Fables of Infidelity 

AND 

pACTg Of ^ith: 



BEING AN EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCES OF 
INFIDELITY. 



BY 



Rev. ROBERT PATTERSON, D. V. 



REVISED AND ENLARGED. 



V"' i\* % IS & & 

CINCINNATI: 

WESTERN TRACT SOCIETY. 

1875. 







Entered according to Act of Congres3, in the year 1875, by 

WESTERN TRACT SOCIETY, 
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, Washington, D. C. 



Stereotyped by 
OGDEN^AMPBELL & CO., 
^^°^ m P t, » Cincinnati. 



in 

CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

PAGE. 

Did the World Make Itself? .... 7 

Eternity of Matter. 

Disproved by its Composite Nature. 

Disproved by its Motion. 

Evolution only a big Perpetual Motion Humbug. 
"Work of a Designer in the Structure of the Eye. 
The Eye-Maker sees over a wide Field and far. 
The Eye-Maker sees Perfectly. 



CHAPTER II. 
Was Your Mother a Monkey? .... 34 

The Divine Fact of Evolution Quite Different from the 

Atheistic Theory. 
State the Question Sharply — "Why ? 
Darwin's Answer. 

The Ancestral Monkey, Fish, Squirt. 
Natural Selection. 
Intended to Exclude God. 

1. The History of the Theory. 

Indian; Phoenician; Greek; Popish; La Place's Theory; 

The Vestiges of Creation. 
Herbert Spencer's Contradictory Theory. 

(iii) ' 



iv 



CONTENTS. 



The Evolutionists 7 Hell. 

Spontaneous Generation — two Theories; the Conflicting 
Theories of Progress; Tremaux; Lamarek; the Cli- 
matal ; Darwin's; Huxley's; Parson's; Mivart's; Hyatt's; 
Cope's ; Wallace's; the Gods; Denounced by the Princes 
of Science. 

A gassiz's Deliverance Against it. 

Imperfection of the Theory Eked out. 

Huxley's Protoplasm. 

Tyndall's Potency of Life in Matter. 

Buchner"s Matter and Force. 

Lubbock's Origin of Civilization. 

Consequences of the Brutal Origin of Man. 

Propagandise of Atheism. 

2. The Theory Illogical and Incoherent. 

Darwin Admits Insufficiency of Proof. 

Useless as an Explanation of Nature. 

Self-Contradictory; e.g., Protoplasm. 

"Wallace's Self-Contradictions. 

Incoherency of the Denial of Design with the Assertion of 
Progress. 

Failure of Alleged Pacts to Sustain the Theory. 
Does not Account for the Origin of Anything. 
Wild Assumptions Made by Darwin. 

Erroneous Assumption of the Tendency of Natural Selec- 
tion to Improve Breeds. 

Assumption of Infinite Possibility of Progress in Finite 
Creatures. 

3. An Unfounded Theory. 
No Evidence of the Facts Possible. 
None Ever Alleged, save Gulliver's. 

Domestication Disproves Transmutation — Horses; Pigeons; 
Dogs. 

The Egyptian Monuments. 
The Mummied Animals. 



CONTENTS. 



The Geological Eecord. 

The Limits of Geological Time. 

4. Embryology. 

Testimony of Scientists : 

1. Embryology Only Analogical. 

2. Embryos not all Alike. 

3. Four Distinct Plans of Structure. 

4. Germs Always True to the Breed. 

5. Gradations of Species. 
Lamarek's Statement. 

Birth Descent not Inferable from Gradation. 

No such Imperceptible Blending in Nature. 

The Fact of the Present Existence of Distinct Species. 

Sterility of Hybrids. 

Geological Species Distinct. 

The Intermediate Forms not Found. 

The Gradation Does not Begin with the Lowest Forms. 

Four Kingdoms from the Beginning. 

The New Species Began with the Giants. 

The Gaps Fatal to the Theory. 

The Abyss Between Death and Life. 

The Gulf Between the Plant and the Animal. 

The Gaps Between Species Which will not Breed Together. 

The Gaps Between Air Breathers and Water Breathers, &c. 

The Great Gulf Between the Brute and the Man. 

Natural Selection Could not Have Deprived a Monkey of 
Hair. 

Nor Have Given a Human Brain. 

The Brain-Worker Contravenes Natural Selection at Every 
Step. 

Civilization the Contradiction of Natural Selection. 
Morality and Beligion the Direct Contraries of Natural 
Selection. 

Tendency Immoral, Degrading, and Atheistic. 



vi 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER in. 
Is Glod Everybody, and Everybody Grod? . . 91 

Pantheism Described. 
An Antiquated Hindooism. 
A Jesuitical Atheism. 
Grossly Immoral. 
A Practical Atheism. 



CHAPTER IV. 
Have We Any Need of the Bible? . . .112 

Civilization and the Bible. 
Eevelation ]S"ot Impossible. 
The Mythical Theory. 
The Inner Light. 
Many Ignorant of God. 
Heathen Morality — Plato's. 
Infidel Morality — Paine's. 



CHAPTER Y. 
Who Wrote the New Testament? . . .147 

The Bible Not Just Like Any Other Book. 

Two Modes of Investigation. 

Did the Council of Nice Make the Bible ? 

The Mythical Theory. 

The Evidence of Celsus. 

The Fragment Hypothesis. 

The Bank Signature Book. 

Could the New Testament be Corrupted? 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER VI. 
Is the Gospel Fact or Fable? . . . .169 

The Nature of Historical Evidence ; Letters ; Monuments. 
Contemporary Letters of Peter, Pliny and John. 
Prove the Existence of Churches. 
And Their "Worship, Holiness, and Sufferings. 



CHAPTER VII. 
Can We Believe Christ and His Apostles? . . 190 

The Gospel a Unit ; Must Take or Eefuse it All. 
Apostles' Testimony Circumstantial. 
"Witnesses Numerous and Independent. 
Confirm Their Testimony with Their Blood. 



CHAPTER VIII. 
Prophecy, 210 

Political— Napoleon's — "Wrong. 
Presidential Candidates. 

Drapers Dogma of Youth and Decrepitude of Nations. 

Statesmen Prophets. 

General Claim for All Genius. 

Instances of Secular Prediction: 

Cayotte's of the French Eevolution. 

The Oracles of Apollo. 

Yettius Valen's Twelve Vultures. 

Spencer's of the Disruption of the American 
Union. 

Saint Malachi's Prophecies. 
Mohammed's Prophecies. 
Seneca's of the Discovery of America. 
Dante's of the Keformation. 
Plato's of Shakespeare. 



viii 



CONTENTS. 



Symbolical Language of Prophecy. 
Anybody may Predict Downfall of Nations. 
An Awful Truth if it be True. 

But Bible Predictions Circumstantial — Egypt; Babylon; Nineveh; 
Judea. 

Predict Life and Eesurrection. 

The Arabs; Jews; Seven Churches; Messiah. 



CHAPTEK IX. 
Moses and the Prophets, 266 

God the Author of the Bible. 

Every Other Book Inspired? 

Connection of Bible History and Morality. 

Hume's Sophism. Miracles Being Violations of Laws of 

Nature, Contrary to an Unalterable Experience. 
No Testimony can Eeach to the Supernatural. 
Becords of Facts Not Judged by Your Notions. 
Kationalistic Explanation of the Miracles. 
Bible Account of Creation Unscientific. 
Antiquity of Man. 

The Anachronisms of the Pentateuch. 
Bishop Colenso's Blunders : 

The Universality of the Deluge. 

Joshua Causing the Sun to Stand Still. 

Cain's Wife. 

Increase of Jacob's Family in Egypt. 

The Number of the First-Born. 

The Fourth Generation. 

The Bishop's Blunders in Camp Life. 

Sterility of the Wilderness. 

Population of the Promised Land. 
Modern Discoveries in Bible Lands 
Egyptian Monuments of Joseph. 



CONTENTS. 

Assyrian Ethnology and Genesis, Chaps, x. and xi. 
Sennacherib's Conquest of Palestine. 
Belshazzar's Kingship. 

The Moabitic Inscriptions, and Omri and Ahab. 

The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

The Character of the Books — Austere. 

Variety of "Writers and Unity of Plan. 

Contained the Surveys, and the Laws of the Nation. 

Introduced New and Eepublican Usages. 

Moses' Law in Advance of Modern Social Science. 

Testimony of the Jewish Nation. 

Testimony of Christ. 

The Lost Books. 

The Law Abolished by the Gospel. 

The Imperfect Morality of Old Testament. 

Polygamy, Slavery, and Divorce. 

The Education of the "World a Gradual Process. 

The Imprecations of Scripture. 



CHAPTER X. 

Infidelity Among the Stars, 

Scientific Objections to the Bible. 

The Infinity and Self-Existence of the Universe. 

Disproved by 

Its Evident Limits. 

Its Composite Materials. 

Its Steady Loss of Heat. 
Buflbn's Explosion of Planets. 
The Nebular Theories. 
The Eiction of Homogeneous Matter. 
The Contradictory Theories. 
The Perpetual Motion Machine. 



CONTENTS. 



Contrary to Facts of Astronomy. 
Contradicted by Astronomers. 
Impossibility of any Cosmogony. 



CHAPTER XL 

Daylight Before Sunrise, . 

Infidel Objections to Genesis. 
The Hindoo Chronology. 
The Egyptian Chronology. 
The Bible Age of the Earth. 
The Solid Firmament. 
Light Before the Sun. 



CHAPTER XII. 
Telescopic Views of Scripture, . 

The Source of the Water of the Deluge. 

The Stars Fighting Against Sisera. 

The Astronomers of the Great Pyramid. 

The Grand ^Motion of the Sun. 

The Formation of Dew. 

The Multitude of the Stars. 

The Descent of the Heavenly City. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

Science or Faith? 

Must Faith Fade Before Science? 
Scientists as Partial as Other People. 
Have no Such Certainty as is Claimed. 



CONTENTS. 



1. Mathematical Errors. 
The Infinite Half Inch, Etc. 

The Doctrine of Chances. 

No Mathematical Figures in Nature. 

The French Metric System. 

The Lowell Turbine Wheel. 

2. Errors of Astronomy. 
Kant's Predictions ; Le Yerrier's. 
Herschel's Enumeration of Errors. 

Sun's Distance; Other Measurements. 

The Moon's Structure and Influence. 

La Place's Proposed Improvement. 

The Sun's Structure, Heat, Etc. 

The Sizes, Distances, and Densities of the Planets. 

Errors About the Nebulae. 

Errors About Comets. 

The Cosmical Ether. 

The Cold of Infinite Space. 

From This Chaos Springs the Theory of Development. 

3. Errors of Geology. 
No Fact of Geology Anti-Biblical. 
All Anti-Biblical Theories Based on an If. 
No Geological Measure of Time. 

All Calculations of Time by Geologists, which Have Been 
Tested, Have Proved Erroneous — the Danish Bogs; 
the Swiss Lake Tillage?; Horner's Nil© Pottery; the 
Kaised Beaches of Scotland; Lyell's Blunder in the 
Delta of the Mississippi; Sir "Wm. Thompson's Ex- 
posure of the Absurdity of the Evolutionists' Demands 
for Time. 

Conflicting Geological Theories— the Wernerian, Huttonian, 
and Diluvian Theories; the Catastrophists and Pro- 
gressionists; Eleven Theories of Earthquakes; Nine 
Theories of Mountains; False Geology of America; 
Scotland Kicked About Too. 



xii 



CONTENTS. 



4. Errors of Zoology. 

Lamarek's Vestiges; Tremaux; Darwin's Contradictions; 

Huxley ; Mivart, and Wallace. 
Blunders of the French Academy, Denouncing Quinine, 

Vaccination, Lightning Bods, and Steam Engines. 
Uncertainty of Science Increases in Human Concerns. 
Second-hand Science Founded on Somebody's Say So. 

5. All Science Founded on Faith. 
Eeason Also Based on Faith. 
This Life Depends on Faith. 

We Demand Truths of which Science is Ignorant. 
All Our Chief Concem-s in the Domain of Faith. 
Beligion the Most Experimental of the Sciences. 
The Only Science which can Make You Happy. 
Try for Yourself. 



PEEFACE. 



This is not so much a volume upon the Evidences of Christianity, 
as an examination of the Evidences of Infielity. When the Infidel 
tells us that Christianity is false, and asks us to reject it, he is bound 
of course to provide us with something better and truer instead; 
under penalty of being considered a knave trying to swindle us out 
of our birthright, and laughed at as a fool, for imagining that he 
could persuade mankind to live and die without religion. Suppose 
he had proved to the world's satisfaction that all religion is a hoax, 
and all men professing it are liars, how does that comfort me in my 
hour of sorrow? Scoffing will not sustain a man in his solitude, 
when he has nobody to scoff at; and disbelief is only a bottomless 
tub, which will not float me across the dark river. If Infidels in- 
tend to convert the world, they must give us some positive system 
of truth which we can believe, and venerate, and trust. 

A glimmering idea of this necessity seems lately to have dawned 
upon some of them. It is quite possible that they have also felt 
the want of something for their own souls to believe; for an Infi- 
del has a soul, a poor, hungry, starved soul, just like other men. At 
any rate, having grown tired of pelting the Church with the dirt- 
balls of Voltaire and Paine, they begin to acknowledge that it is, 
after all, an institution; and that the Bible is an influential book, 
both popular and useful in its way. Mankind, it seems, will have 
a Church ar d a Bible of some sort; why not go to work and make 
a Church and a Dible of their own ? Accordingly they have gone to 
work, and in a very short time have prepared a variety of ungodly 
religions, so various that the worldly-minded man who can not be 
suited with one to his taste must be very hard to please. Discord- 
ant and contiadictory in their positive statements, they are agreed 
only in negatives; denying the God of the Bible, the resurrection 
of the dead, and judgment to come. Nevertheless each discoverer 
or constructer presents his system to the world with great confi- 
dence, large claims to superior benevolence, vast pretensions to 

(1) 



2 



PKEFACE. 



learning and science, and no little cant about duty and piety. 
"Wonderful to tell, some of them are very fond of clothing their 
ungodliness in the language of Scripture. 

"No pains are spared to secure the wide spread of these notions. 
Prominent Infidels are invited to deliver courses of scientific lec- 
tures, in which the science is made the medium of conveying the 
Infidelity. Scientific books, novels, magazines, daily newspapers, 
and common school books, are all enlisted in the work. The dis- 
ciples of Infidelity are numerous and zealous. It would be hard to 
find a factory, boarding-house, steamboat or hotel where twelve per- 
sons are employed, without an Infidel; and harder still to find an 
Infidel who will not use his influence to poison his associates. 

These systems are well adapted to the depraved tastes of the age. 
The business man, whose whole foul is set on money-making and 
spending, is right glad to meet the Secularist, who will prove to 
him on scientific principles, that a man is much profited by gaining 
the whole world, even at the risk of his soul, if he has such a thing. 
The young and ill-instructed professor of Christianity, whose long- 
ings for forbidden joys are strong, has a natural kindliness toward 
Eationalism, which befogs the serene light of God's holy law, and 
gives the directing power to his own inner liking. The sentimental 
young lady, who would recoil from the grossness of the Deist, is 
attracted by the poetry of Pantheism. Infidelity has had, in con- 
sequence, a degree of success very little suspected by simple-minded 
pastors and parents, and which is often discovered too late for 
remedy. 

This book is written to expose the folly of some of these novel 
systems of Infidelity — leaving others to show their wickedness. It 
may surprise some who would glory in being esteemed fiends, to 
learn that they are only fools. If they should be awakened now 
to a sense of the absurdities which they cherish as philosophy, it 
might save them from awaking another day to the shame and ever- 
lasting contempt of the universe. 

I have not taken up all the cavils of Infidelity. Their name is 
Legion. Kor have I troubled my readers with any which they are 
not likely to hear. Leaving the sleeping dogs to lie, I have noticed 
only such as I have known to bark and bite in my own neighbor- 
hood, and know to be rife here in the West. They are stated, as 
nearly as possible, in the words in which I have heard them in 
public debate, or in private conversation with gentlemen of Infidel 



PREFACE. 



3 



principles. I have made no references to books or writers on that 
side, save to such as I am assured were the sources of their senti- 
ments. In such cases I have named and quoted the authors. 
"Where no such quotations are noticed it will be understood that I 
am responsible for the fairness with which I have represented the 
opinions which are examined. It is not my design to fight men of 
straw. 

Every historical or scientific fact adduced in support of the argu- 
ments here used is confirmed by reference to the proper authority. 
But it has not been deemed needful to crowd the pages with refer- 
ences to the works of Christian apologists. The Christian scholar 
does not need such references ; while to those for whose benefit I 
write, their names carry no authority, and their arguments are gen- 
erally quite unknown. One great object of my labor will be gained 
if I shall succeed in awaking the spirit of inquiry among my read- 
ers, to such an extent as to lead them to a prayerful and patient 
perusal of several of the works named on the next page. They 
have heard only one side of the question, and will be surprised at 
their own ignorance of matters which they ought to have known. 

Books on the Evidences are not generally circulated. Ministers 
perhaps have some volumes in their libraries ; but in a hundred 
houses, it would be hard to find half a dozen containing as many as 
would give an inquiring youth a fair view of the historical evi- 
dences of the truth of the gospel. Nor, where they are to be found, 
are they generally read. Being deemed heavy reading, the maga- 
zine, or the newspaper is preferred. Ministers do not in general 
devote enough of their time to such sound teaching as will stop the 
mouths of gainsayers. I have been assured by skeptical gentlemen, 
who in the early part of their lives had attended church regularly 
for twenty-two years, that during all that time they had never 
heard a single discourse on the Evidences. Moreover, the pr tean 
forms of Infidelity are so various, and many of its present positions 
so novel, that books or discourses prepared only twenty years ago 
miss the mark; and rather expose to the charge of misrepresenta- 
tion, than produce conviction. New books on Infidelity are needed 
for every generation. 

The lectures expanded into this volume were delivered in Cin- 
cinnati, in 1858. Keplying to different, and discordant systems of 
error, whose only bond is opposition to the gospel, they are neces- 
sarily somewhat disconnected. No attempt was made to mold 



4 



PREFACE. 



them into a suit of royal armor, but merely to select a few smooth 
pebbles from the brook of truth, which any Christian lad might 
sling at the giant defiers of the armies of the living God. Having 
proved acceptable for this purpose, and a steadily increasing demand 
for repeated editions wearing out the original plates, the author 
has been requested by British and American publishers to revise 
the work in the light of the recent discoveries of science. This he 
has attempted ; with what success the reader will judge. Conscious 
of its many defects, yet grateful to God for the good which he has 
done to many souls by its instrumentality, the author again com- 
mends the book to the Father of Lights, praying him to use it as a 
mirror to flash such a ray of light into many dark souls as may lead 
them into the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the 
face of Jesus Christ. 
San Francisco, March 30, 1875. 



The author having been repeatedly asked by inquirers for the 
name3 of books on the Evidences of Christianity, subjoins a list of 
those easily accessible in the West. It is not supposed that any 
one inquirer will read all these; but it is well to read more than 
one, since the evidence is cumulative, and it is impossible for any 
writer to present the whole. Having a list of several works, the 
inquirer who can not obtain one may be able to procure another. 
There are many other works on the Evidences on the shelves of all 
our principal booksellers. 

Modern Atheism, by James Buchanan, LL. D. 

Typical Forms and Special Ends in Creation, by James McCosh, 

LL. D., and George Dickie, M. D. 
Religion and Geology, Edward Hitchcock, LL. D. 
The Architecture of the Heavens, J. P. Nichol, LL. D 
The Christian Philosopher, Thomas Dick, LL. D. 
Natural Theology, William Paley, D. D. 

The Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Constitution 

and Course of Nature, Joseph Butler, D. C. L. 
The Bridgevjater Treatises, Whewell, Chalmers, Kidd, &c. 
The Comprehensive Commentary, William Jenks, D. D. 
The Cause and Cure of Infidelity, Ecv. David Nelson. 
A View of the Evidences of Christianity, William Paley, D. D 
The Eclipse of Faith, ascribed to Henry Kogers. 



PREFACE. 



5 



The Restoration of Belief, ascribed to Isaac Taylor. 

Lectures on the Evidences of Christianity, University of Virginia. 

The Divine Authority of the Old and New Testaments Asserted, J 

Leland, D. D. 
The Bible Commentary. 

An Apology for the Bible, in a Series of Letters to Thomas Paine, R. 
Watson. 

A View of the Internal Evidence of the Christian Religion, S. Jenyns. 
A Letter to G. West, Esq., on the Conversion of St. Paul, Lord 
Lyttleton. 

Observations on the History and Evidence of the Resurrection of 

Jesus Christ, Gilbert West, Esq. 
Difficulties of Infidelity, Faber. 

Dissertations on the Prophecies, Thos. Newton, D. D. 
An Introduction to the Critical Study of the Scriptures, T. H. Home, 
Vol. I. 

The Evidences of Christianity, Charles Petit Mcllvaine, D. D. 

Rawlinsorts Historical Evidences. 
Modern Skepticism, by Joseph Barker. 

Haley 's Discrepancies of the Bible, W. G. Holmes, Chicago. 

The Superhuman Origin of the Bible, Rogers. 

Christianity and Positivism, McCosh. 

The Supernatural in Relation to the Natural, McCosh. 

Aids to Faith, Appleton & Co. 

Modern Skepticism, Randolph & Son. 

Modern Doubt, Christlieb. 

Alexander's Evidences of Christianity. 



V 



CHAPTER I. 




ORLD 




TSELF? 



Understand, ye brutish among the people ; 
And, ye fools, when will ye be wise ? 
He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? 
He that formed the eye, shall he not see ? 
He that chastiseth the heathen, shall he be not correct ? 
He that teacheth man knowledge, shall he not know ? — Psalm 
xciv. 8, 9. 

Has the Creator of the world common sense ? Did he 
know what he was about in making it? Had he any object 
in view in forming it? Does he know what is going on- in 
it? Does he care whether it answers any purpose or not? 
Strange questions you will say ; yet we need to ask a 
a stranger question: Had the world a Creator, or did it 
make itself? There are persons who say it did, and who 
declare that the Bible sets out with a lie when it says, 
that "In the beginning God created the heavens and the 
earth." Whereas, say they, ; ' We know that matter is 
eternal, and the world is wholly composed of matter; 
therefore, the heavens and the earth are eternal, never had 
a beginning nor a Creator." 

But, however fully the atheist may know that matter is 
eternal, we do not know any such thing, and must be 
allowed to ask, How do you know? As you are not eternal, 
we can not take it on your word. 



CO 



8 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF ? 



The only reason which anybody ever ventured for this 
amazing assertion is this, that "all philosophers agree that 
matter is naturally indestructible by any human power. 
You may boil water into steam, but it is all there in the 
steam ; or burn coal into gas, ashes, and tar, but it is all in 
the gas, ashes, and tar ; you may change the outward form 
as much as you please, but you can not destroy the sub- 
stance of anything. Wherefore, as matter is indestructible, 
it must be eternal." 

Profound reasoning! Here is a brick fresh from the 
kiln. It will last for a thousand years to come; therefore, 
it has existed for a thousand years past ! 

The foundation of the argument is as rotten as the 
superstructure. It is not agreed among all philosophers 
that matter is naturally indestructible, for the very satis- 
factory reason that none of them can tell what matter in 
its own nature is. All that they can undertake to say is, 
that they have observed certain properties of matter, and, 
among these, that "it is indestructible by any operation to 
which it can be subjected in the ordinary course of circum- 
stances observed at the surface of the globe. "* The very 
utmost which any man can assert in this matter is a 
negative, a want of knowledge, or a want of power. He can 
say, "Human power can not destroy matter;" and, if he 
pleases, he may reason thence that human power did not 
create it. But to assert that matter is eternal because man 
can not destroy it, is as if a child should try to beat the 
cylinder of a steam engine to pieces, and, failing in the at- 
tempt, should say, "I am sure this cylinder existed from 
eternity, because I am unable to destroy it." 

But not only is the assertion of the eternity of matter 
unproven, and impossible to be proved, it is capable of the 
most demonstrable refutation, by one of the recent dis- 



*Keid's Chemistry, II. \ 37. 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



9 



coveries of science. The principle of the argument is 
so plain that a child of four years old can understand it. 
It is simply this, that all substances in heaven and earth 
are compounded of several elements; but no compound can 
be eternal. 

We say to our would-be philosophers, When you tell us 
that matter is eternal, how does that account for the for- 
mation of this world ? What is this matter you speak of? 
This world consists not of a philosophical abstraction called 
matter, nor yet of one substance known by that name, but 
of a great variety of material substances, oxygen, hydrogen, 
carbon, sulphur, iron, aluminum, and some fifty others 
already discovered.* Now, which of these is the eterna- 
matter you speak of? Is it iron, or sulphur, or clay, or 
oxygen? If it is any one of them, where did the others 
come from? Did a mass of iron, becoming discontented 
with its gravity, suddenly metamorphose itself into a cloud 
of gas, or into a pail of water? Or are they all eternal? 
Have we fifty-seven eternal beings? Are they all eternal 
in their present combinations? or is it only the single 
elements that are eternal ? You see that your hypothesis — 
that matter is eternal — gives me no light on the formation 
of this world, which is not a shapeless mass of a philosophi- 
cal abstraction called matter, but a regular and beautiful 
building, composed of a great variety of matters. Was it 
so from eternity ? No man who was ever in a quarry, or a 
gravel pit, will say so, much less one who has the least 
smattering of chemistry or geology. Do you assert the 
eternity of the fifty-seven single substances, either separate 
or combined in some other way than we now find them in 
the rocks, and rivers, and atmosphere of the earth ? Then 
how came they to get together at all, and particularly how 
did they put themselves in their present shapes ? 



f Johnson's Turner's Chemistry, § 341. 



10 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



Each of them is a piece of matter of which inertia is a 
primary and inseparable property. Matter of itself can not 
begin to move, or assume a quiescent state after being put 
in motion. 

Will you tell us that the fifty-seven primary elements 
danced about till the air, and sea, and earth, somehow jum- 
bled themselves together into the present shape of this 
glorious and beautiful world, with all its regularity of day 
and night, and summer and winter, with all its beautiful 
flowers and lofty trees, with all its variety of birds, and 
beasts, and fishes ? To bring the matter down to the level 
of the intellect of the most stupid pantheist, tell us in plain 
English, Die? the paving stones make themselves? For the 
paving stones are made out of a dozen different chemical 
constituents, and each one is built up more ingeniously than 
the house you live in. Now, did the paving stones make 
themselves? 

No conviction of the human mind is more certain than 
the belief that every combination of matter proves the ex- 
istence of a combiner, that every house has had a builder, 
and that every machine has had a maker. No matter how 
simple the combination, if it be only two laths fastened to- 
gether by a nail, or two bricks cemented with mortar, or 
the sole of an old pegged boot, all the atheists in the world 
could not convince you that those two laths, or those two 
bricks, or those two bits of leather existed in such a com- 
bination from all eternity. If any wise philosopher tried 
to persuade you that for anything you could tell they might 
have been always so, you would reply, " No, sir ! You can't 
cram such stuff down my throat. Even a child's common 
sense shows him that those two laths were not always so 
nailed together; that those two bricks were not always so 
placed, one on the top of the other; and that those two 
pieces of old sole leather were not always pegged together 
in the sole of a boot." There is no conviction more irre- 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



11 



sistible than our belief that no compound can possibly be 
eternal. 

But the universe is the greatest of all compounds. Ev- 
erything in it is compound. Chemists speak of simple 
substances, or elements of matter, and it is well enough to 
separate the elements of things in our thoughts, for the 
sake of distinct consideration, and to speak of the proper- 
ties of pure oxygen, or of pure hydrogen, or of pure car- 
bon, or of pure gold, or of pure iron, or of pure silver. 
But then we should always remember that there is nothing 
pure in the world, that there is no such thing in nature as 
any substance consisting only of a single element, pure and 
uncombined with others. Just as your gold eagle is not 
pure gold, but alloyed with copper, everything in nature is 
alloyed. Everything in the heavens above, and in the earth 
beneath, and in the waters under the earth, is compound. 
The air you breathe, simple as it seems, is composed of 
three gases, and is besides full of what Huxley calls "a 
stirabout" of millions of seeds of animalculae and motes 
of dust visible in the sunbeam. That hydrant water you 
are about to swallow is a rich aquarium full of all manner 
of monsters, which the oxy-hydrogen microscope will ex- 
hibit to your terrified gaze, devouring each other alive. 
Should you get rid of them by evaporating your water, your 
chemist will tell you that still your pure water must be a 
compound of oxygen and hydrogen. There is no help for it. 

Many years ago some astronomers fancied they had 
found clouds, or nebulae, of gas, quite simple and uncom- 
pounded with anything else, a great many millions of miles 
away in the sky. They were so very far away that they 
thought nobody would ever be able to fly so far to bottle 
up a specimen of that gas and bring it back here to earth 
and analyze it, to find out whether it was pure and simple, 
or compound. So # they felt quite safe in affirming that 
there was the genuine, simple, homogeneous gas, in the neb- 



12 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



ulae, with which Almighty God had nothing whatever to 
do, but which had first made itself and then had condensed 
into our present world. But unfortunately for this bril- 
liant discovery the spectroscope opened windows into the 
nebulas, and showed very plainly that they were on fire; 
and fire is a compound; it can not burn without fuel and 
something to support the combustion; so that settled the 
alleged simplicity of the nebulas. It is now demonstrated, 
therefore, that every known substance existing in nature is 
a compound, and therefore can not be eternal. And the 
whole is not greater than the sum of its parts. No num- 
ber of finite existences can be eternal. The universe, then, 
can not be eternal. 

Suppose, however, that, for the sake of argument, we 
should grant our atheistic world-builder his materials, away 
off beyond the rings of Saturn, or the orbit of Uranus 
(since he seems to like to have his quarries a good way off 
from his building), would he be any nearer the completion 
of his world-making? As Cornwallis declared that the 
conquest of India resolved itself u timately into a question 
of bullocks, the prime consideration in the construction of 
the world, after you have got your materials, is that of 
transportation. When one beholds the three great stones 
in the temple of Baalbec, each weighing eleven hundred 
tons, built into the wall twenty feet high, and a fourth in 
the quarry, a mile away, nearly ready for removal, he asks, 
"How did the builders movewfchose immense stones, and 
raise them to their places?" And when we behold the 
quarry out of which these stones were taken, and all the 
other quarries of the world, and all the everlasting moun- 
tains, and the whole of this solid earth, and boundless sea, 
brought, as our theorists affirm, from far beyond the orbit 
of the most distant planet, we raise the question of trans- 
portation, and demand some account of the wagon and 
team which hauled them to their places. We can not get 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



13 



rid of the necessity for transportation by evaporating the 
building stones into gas, for a world of gas weighs just as 
many tons as the world made out of it. Before we can 
make a world we must have power; but we can never get 
power out of the world to build itself. The atheists' world 
is only a great machine. The first law of mechanics is 
that action and reaction are equal; consequently machinery 
can never create power. You will never lift yourself by 
pulling at your boot-straps; much less can a machine lift 
and carry itself. 

It is no matter how big you make the wheels of your 
machine, as big as the orbits of the planets if you like, 
still it is only a machine, unless it has a mind in it; and 
your big machine can no more create power than a little 
machine as small as a lady's watch. Nor does it make the 
least difference in respect to making power, of what mate- 
rials your perpetual motion peddler makes his machine — 
whether of a skein of silk on a reel in a bottle, or of steel 
and zinc electro magnets running upon diamond points, or 
whether he melts up his steel, and zinc, and diamonds into 
red hot fire mist; it is still only a machine, made of these 
materials, as destitute of power as the smaller machines 
made out of it. The atheists' universe is only a big ma- 
chine, and no machine can create power, no more than a 
paving stone. 

It has been, however, proposed to manufacture power by 
the law of gravitation, according to which all bodies attract 
each other, directly in proportion to their mass, and in- 
versely as the square of their distances. This law appears 
to prevail as far as our observation extends through space ; 
\ and our world builders affirm that it must have operated 
eternally, and that not only were the separate parts of our 
earth thus drawn together, but that all the orbs of heaven 
were caused to revolve under its influence. 

Suppose, however, we grant that matter was eternal, and 



14 



BID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



the force of gravitation eternally operating npon it, wonld 
that sufficiently account for the building up of even our 
own little planetary system? By no means. 

The unresisted force of gravitation would, in far less than 
an eternity, draw all things together toward the center of 
gravity of the universe. We should not have separate stars, 
and suns, and planets, and moons, revolving in orderly or- 
bits, but one vast mass of matter, in which all motion had 
long since ceased. There must be some power of resist- 
ance to gravitation, and nicely balanced against it, a centri- 
fugal force — no matter whether you call it heat, light, or 
electricity, or by any tfther name— from which balance of 
power the movements of the universe are regulated. But 
here again we arrive at the same conclusion from the bal- 
ance of power to which we were before driven by the com- 
bination of matter — regulated power proclaims a regulator, 
a governor. Power belongeth unto God. 

In world-building we need not only a quarry of mate- 
rials, and power for transportation, but a head to plan their 
arrangement. For, as ten thousand loads of brick and 
stone dumped down higgledy piggledy will not build a 
house, neither will ten thousand millions of materials 
poured into a chaos make a world like this earth, arranged 
in order and beauty. It is grossly absurd to imagine that 
the inanimate materials of the earth arranged themselves 
in their present orderly structure. 

Absurd as it seems to every man of common sense, there 
are persons claiming to be philosophers who not only assert 
that they did, but will tell you how they did it. One class 
of them think they have found it out by supposing every 
thing in the universe reduced to very fine powder, consist- 
ing of very small grains, which they call atoms; or, if that 
is not fine enough, into gas, of which it is supposed the 
particles are too fine to be perceived; and then by different 
arrangements of these atoms, according to the laws of at- 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



15 



traction and electricity, the various elements of the world 
were made, and arranged in its present form. 

Suppose we grant this gassy supposition, that the world 
millions of ages ago existed as a cloud of atoms, does that 
bring us any nearer the object of getting rid of a Creator 
than before? The atoms must be material, if a mate- 
rial world is to be made from them ; and so they must be 
extended ; each one of them must have length, breadth 
and thickness. The atheist, then, has only multiplied his 
difficulties a million times, by pounding up the world into 
atoms, which are only little bits of the paving stones he 
intends to make out of them. Each bit of the paving 
stone, no matter how small you break it, remains just as 
incapable of making itself, or moving itself, as was the 
whole stone composed of all these bits. So we are landed 
back again at the sublime question, Did the paving stones 
make themselves, and move themselves? 

Others will tell you that millions of years ago the world 
existed as a vast cloud of fire mist, which, after a long 
time, cooled down into granite, and the granite, by dint of 
earthquakes, got broken up on the surface, and washed 
with rain into clay and soil, whence plants sprang up of 
their own accord, and the plants gradually grew into ani- 
mals of various kinds, and some of the animals grew into 
monkeys, and finally the monkeys into men. The fire m st 
they stoutly affirm to have existed from eternity. They 
do not allege that they remember that (and yet as they 
themselves are, as they say, composed body and soul of this 
eternal fire mist, they ought to remember), but only that there 
are certain comets which occasionally come within fifty or 
sixty millions of miles of this earth, which they suppose 
may be composed of the fire mist which they suppose this 
world is made of. A solid basis, truly, on which to build 
a world ! A cloud in the sky, fifty million of miles away, 
may possibly be fire mist, may possibly cool down and con- 



16 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



dense into a solid globe ; therefore, this fire mist is eternal, 
snd had no need of a Creator ; and our world, and all 
other worlds, may possibly have been like it; therefore, 
they also were never created by Almighty God. Such is 
the atheist's ground of faith. The thinnest vapor or the 
merest supposition will suffice to risk his eternal salvation 
upon ; provided only it contradicts the Bible and gets rid 
of God. We can not avoid asking with as much gravity 
as we can command, Where did the mist come from ? 
Did the mist make itself? Where did the fire come from? 
Did it kindle of its own accord ? Who put the fire and 
mist together ? Was it red hot enough from all eternity 
to melt granite ? Then why is it any cooler now ? How 
could an eternal red heat cool down ? If it existed as a 
red hot fire mist from eternity, until our atheist began 
to observe it beginning to cool, why should it ever begin 
to cool at all, and why begin to cool just then? Fill it as 
full of electricity, magnetism and odyle as you please ; do 
these afford any reason for its very extraordinary conduct ? 
The utmost they do is to show you how such a change 
took place, but they neither tell you where the original 
matter come from, nor why its form was changed. Change 
is an effect, and every effect requires a cause. There could 
be no cause outside of the fire mist; for they say there was 
nothing else in the universe. Then the cause must be in 
the mist itself. Had it a mind, and a will, and a percep- 
tion of propriety? Did the mist become sensible of the 
lightness of its behavior, and the fire resolve to cool off a 
little, and both consult together on the propriety of drop- 
ping their erratic blazing through infinite space, and re- 
solve to settle down into orderly, well-behaved suns and 
planets? In the division of the property, what became of 
the mind? Did it go to the sun, or to the moon, or to the 
pole star, or to this earth? Or, was it clipped up into lit- 
tle pieces and divided among the stars in proportion to 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



17 



their respective magnitudes; so that the sun may have, say 
the hundredth part of an idea, and the moon a faint per- 
ception of it? Did the fire mist's mind die under this cruel 
clipping and dissecting process ; or is it of the nature of a 
polypus, each piece alive and growing up to perfection in 
its own way? Has each of the planets and fixed stars a 
great "soul of the world" as well as this earth, and are 
they looking down intelligently and compassionately on this 
little globe of ours? Had we not better build altars to all 
the host of heaven and return to the religion of our acorn- 
fed ancestors, who burned their children alive, in honor of 
the sun, on Sun-days? 

An aqueous solution of this difficulty of getting rid of 
Almighty God, is frequently proposed. It is known that 
certain chemical solutions, when mixed together, deposit a 
sediment, or precipitate, as chemists call it. And it is sup- 
posed that the universe was all once in a state of solution, 
in primeval oceans, and that the mingling of the waters of 
these oceans caused them to deposit the various salts and 
earths which form the worlds in the form of mud, which 
afterward hardened into rock, or vegetated into trees and 
men. Thus, it is clearly demonstrated that there is no need 
for the Creator if — if — if — we only had somebody to make 
these primeval oceans — and somebody to mix them to- 
gether!* 

The development theory of the production of the human 
race from the mud, through the mushroom, the snail, the 
tortoise, the greyhound, the monkey and the man, which 

* It might be supposed that such a theory is too palpably absurd 
to be believed by any save the inmates of a lunatic asylum, had not 
the writer, and hundreds of the citizens of Cincinnati, seen a lec- 
turer perform the ordinary experiment of producing colored precip- 
itates by mixing colorless solutions, as a demonstration of the self- 
acting powers of matter. Common sense, being a gift of God, is 
righteously withdrawn from those who deny him. 
2 



18 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



is now such a favorite with atheists, if it were fully proved 
to be a fact, would only increase the difficulty of getting 
rid of God. For either the primeval mud had all the 
germs of the future plants and monkeys, and men's bodies 
and souls, in itself originally, or it had not. If it had not, 
where did it get them? If it had all the life and intelli- 
gence in the universe in itself, it was a very extraordinary 
kind of Grod. We shall call it the mud-god. Our atheists 
then believe in a god of muddy body and intelligent mind. 
But if they deny intelligence to the mud, then we are 
back to our original difficulty v with a large appendix, viz : 
The 'paving stones made themselves first and all atheists 
afterward. 

The whole theory of development is utterly false in its 
first principles. From the beginning of the world to the 
present day, no man has ever observed an instance of the 
spontaneous generation of life. There is no law of nature, 
whether electric, magnetic, odylic, or any other, which can 
produce a living plant or animal, save from the germ or seed 
of some previous plant or animal of the same species. Nor 
has a single instance of the transmutation of species ever 
been proved. Every beast, bird, fish, insect and plant 
brings forth after its kind, and has done so since its crea- 
tion. No law of Natural Philosophy is more firmly estab- 
lished than this, Tliat there is no spontaneous generation, nor 
transmutation of species. It is true there is a regular gra- 
dation of the various orders of animal and vegetable life, 
rising like the steps of a staircase, one above the other ; 
but gradation is no more caused by transmutation than a 
staircase is made by an ambitious lower step changing itself 
into all the upper ones. 

To refer the origin of the world to the laws of nature 
is absurd. Law, as Johnson defines it, is a rule of action. 
It necessarily requires an acting agent, an object designed in 
the action, means to attain it, and authoritative enforcement 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF ? 



19 



of the use of those means by a lawgiver. Are the laws of 
nature laws given by some supposed inte' ligent being, wor- 
shiped by the heathen of old, and by the atheists of mod- 
ern times, under that name? Or do they signify the orderly 
and regular sequence of cause and effect, which is so manifest 
in the course of all events ? If, as atheists say, the latter, 
this is the very thing we want them to account for. How 
came the world to be under law without a lawgiver? Where 
there is law, there must be design. Chance is utterly in- 
consistent with the idea of law. Where there is design 
there must, of necessity, be a designer. Matter in any 
shape, stones or lightnings, mud or magnets, can not 
think, contrive, design, give law to itself, or to any thing 
else, much less bring itself into existence. There is no 
conceivable way of accounting for this orderly world we 
live in but one or other of these two: Either an intelligent 
being created the world, or — the paving stones made them- 
selves. 

" Here are two hypotheses, of which the oldest is admit- 
ted to offer a full and consistent explanation of all the faet3 
of science. There can be no better cause for any given 
formation than that Grod created it so. Men of science, 
however, allege that creation (out of nothing) is ' scientif- 
ically inconceivable but this is only throwing dust in 
our eyes ; of course, science can not verify it, neither can 
it verify any other theory of causation. The question is 
whether reason can accept the fact, though science can not 
even imagine the process ? If not, there is nothing for us 
but the eternity of matter, for evolution itself has to face 
the very same difficulty when asked to account for its pri- 
mal germ. It is surely more conceivable that God created 
the first matter out of nothing, than that nothing evolved 
something out of itself, by an imminent law of its nature. 
This point, however, our scientific men are sadly given to 
shirking. They profess in general not to hold the eter- 



20 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELE? 



nity of matter, but they have nothing to suggest for its 
. origin. They accept it as the starting point of evolution, 
and decline to speculate on its cause. This, as Dr. Christ- 
lieb observes of Bauer's kindred system of criticism, is 
' beginning without a beginning — everything is -already 
extant ' We may as well start with species, as with pro- 
toplasm, if the inquiry is not to be pushed beyond the 
fact. The evolutionist is bound to answer whether the 
process is eternal, or how it began to be. Either it had a 
beginning or it had not ; if it had, creation out of nothing 
is conceded, and there is nothing left to dispute. It is 
puerile to except to the frequency of creative acts on the 
ordinary hypothesis of specific origin, because it is freely 
open to science to reduce the several ' kinds ' to the lowest 
minimum it can experimentally establish. Moreover — be- 
sides the utter inconsequence of such purely relative ideas 
as often and rare — it is far more reasonable that an eternal, 
personal author of creation should watch over his work to 
shape and diversify it at his pleasure, than that, after a 
single act, he should relapse into inertia like the Hindu 
Brahmin. To concentrate the whole evidence of design in 
one original act, ages upon ages ago, with no opening for 
after interference, undermines belief in a personal designer, 
simply because it leaves him nothing to do."* 

Leaving these brutish among the people who assert the 
latter, to the enjoyment of their folly, let us ascertain 
what we can know of the great Creator of the heavens and 
the earth. God refers the atheists of the Psalmist's days 
to their own bodies for proofs of his intelligence, to their 
own minds for proofs of his personality, and to their own 
observation of the judgments of his providence against 
evil-doers for proofs of his moral government. Our text 
ascribes for him perception and intelligence : He that 



*John Bull. 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF ? 



21 



'planted the ear, shall he not hear f He that formed the eye, 
shall he not see? It does not say, he has an eye or an ear, 
but that he has the knowledge we acquire by those organs. 
And the argument is from the designed organ to the de- 
signing maker of it, and is perfectly irresistible. A blind 
god could not make a seeing man. Let us look for a little 
at a few of the many marks of design in this organ to 
which God thus refers us. 

We shall first observe the mechanical skill displayed in 
the formation of the eye, and then the optical arrangements, 
or rather a few of them, for there are more than eight 
hundred distinct contrivances already observed by anato- 
mists in the dead eye, while the great contrivance of all, 
the power of seeing, is utterly beyond their ken. I hold 
in my hand a box made of several pieces of wood glued 
together, and covered on the outside with leather. Inside 
it is lined with cotton, and the cotton has a lining of fine 
white silk. You at once observe that it is intended to 
protect some delicate and precious article of jewelry, and 
that the maker of this box must have been acquainted 
with the strength of wood, the toughness of leather, 
the adhesiveness of glue, the softness and elasticity of 
cotton, the tenacity of silk, and the mode of spinning and 
weaving it, the form of the jewel to be placed in it, and 
the danger against which this box would protect it — ten 
entirely distinct branches of knowledge, which every child 
who should pick up such a box in the street would unhesi- 
tatingly ascribe to its maker. Now, the box in which the 
eye is placed is composed of seven bones glued together 
internally, and covered with skin on the outside, lined 
with the softest fat, enveloped in a tissue compared with 
which the finest silk is only canvas, and the cavity is 
shaped so as exactly to fit the eye, while the brow projects 
over like a roof of a veranda, to keep off falling dust and 
rain from injuring it while the lid is open ; and the eye- 



22 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



brows, like a thatch sloping outward, conduct the sweat of 
the brow, by which a man earns his bread, away around 
the outer cover, that it may not enter the eye and destroy 
the sight. If it were preposterous nonsense to say that 
electricity, or magnetism, or odyle, contrived and made a 
little bracelet box, how much more absurd to ascribe the 
making of the cavity of the eye to any such cause. 

Let us next look at the shape of the eye. You observe 
ifris nearly round in its section across, and rather oval in 
its other direction, and the cavity it lies in is shaped ex- 
actly to fit it. Now there are eyes in the world angular 
and triangular, and even square; and as you may readily 
suppose, the creatures which have them can not move them; 
to compensate for such inconvenience, some of them, as the 
common fly, have several hundred. But, unless our heads 
were as large as sugar hogsheads, we could not be so fur- 
nished, and we must either have movable eyes or see only 
in one direction. Accordingly, the Contriver of the eye 
has hung it with a hinge. Now there are various kinds of 
hinges, moving in one direction, and the Maker of the eye 
might have made a hinge on which the eye would move up 
and down, or he might have given us a hinge that would 
bend right and left, in which case we should have been able 
merely to squint a little in two directions. But to enable 
one to see in every direction, there is only one kind of 
hinge that would answer the purpose — the ball and socket 
joint — and the Former of the eye has hung it with such a 
hinge, retaining it in its place partly by the projection of 
the bones of the face, and partly by the muscles and the 
optic nerve, which is about as thick as a candlewick, and 
as tough as leather. Most of you have seen a ship, and 
know the way the yards are moved, and turned, and squared 
by ropes and pulleys. The rigging of the eye, though 
not so large, is fully as curious. There is a tackle, called 
a muscle, to pull it down when you want to look down ; 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



23 



another tackle to pull it up when you have done ; one to 
pull it to the right, and another to the left ; there is one 
fastened to the eyeball in two places, and geared through 
a pulley which will make it move in any direction, as when 
we roll our eyes; and the sixth, fastened to the under 
side of the eye, keeps it steady when we do not need to 
move it. Then the eyelids are each provided with appro- 
priate gearing, and need to have it durable too, for it is 
used thirty thousand times a day; in fact every time we 
wink. If God had neglected to place these little cords to 
pull up the eyelash, we should all have been in the condi- 
tion of the unfortunate gentleman described by Dr. Nieu- 
wentyt, who was obliged to pull up his eyelashes with 
his fingers whenever he wanted to see. There is, too^ 
another admirable piece of forethought and skill displayed 
by the Former of the eye, in providing a liquid to wash it, 
and a sponge to wipe it with, and a waste pipe, through the 
bone of the nose, to carry off the tears which have been 
used in washing and moistening the eye. Now what ab- 
surdity to say that a law of nature, say gravity, or electricity, 
or magnetism has such knowledge of the principles of me- 
chanics as the eye proclaims its Former to have — that it 
could make a choice among multitudes of shapes of eyes 
and kinds of joints, and this choice the very best for our 
convenience ; and that having known and chosen, it could 
have manufactured the various parts of this complicated 
machine. Such a machine requires an intelligent manufac- 
turer; and yet we have only as yet been looking at the 
dead eye, paying no regard to sight at all. Even a blind 
man's eye prove an intelligent Creator. 

Let us now turn our thoughts to the instrument of sight. 
The optic nerve is the part of the eye which conveys visions 
to the mind. Suppose, instead of being where you observe 
it, at the back part of the eye, it had been brought out to 
the front, and that reflections from objects had fallen di- 



24 DID THE WORLD liAKE ITSELF? 

recti y upon it. It is 
obvious that it would 
have been exposed to 
injury from every float- 
ing particle of dust, and 
you would always have 
felt such a sensation as 
is caused by a burn or 
scald when the skin 
peels off, and leaves 
the ends of the nerves 
exposed to the air. The 
tender points of the fibers of the optic nerve, too, would 
soon become blunted and broken, and the eye, of course, use- 
less. How, then, is the nerve to be protected, and yet the 
sight not obstructed? If it were covered with skin, as the 
other nerves are, you could not see through it. For 
thousands of years after men had eyes and used them, they 
knew no substance, at once hard and transparent, which 
could answer the double purpose of protection and vision. 
And to this day they know none hard enough for protec- 
tion, clear enough for vision, and elastic enough to resume 
its form after a blow. But men did the best they could, 
and put a round piece of brittle but transparent glass in a 
ring of tougher metal for the protection of the hands of a 
watch ; and he who first invented the watch crystal thought 
he had made a discovery. Now, observe in the eye, that 
forward part is the watch glass; the cornea, made of a sub- 
stance at once hard, transparent and elastic — which man 
has never been able to imitate — set into the sclerotica, 
that white, muscular coat which constitutes the white of 
your eye, acts as a frame for the cornea, and answers an- 
other important purpose, as we shall presently see. 

But, supposing the end of the nerve protected by the 
glass, we might have had it brought up to the glass without 




DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



25 



any interposing lenses or humors, as, in fact, is nearly the 
case with some Crustacea. We can not well imagine all the 
inconveniences of such an eye to us. If we could see dis- 
tinctly at all, we could not see much farther or wider than 
the breadth of the end of the nerve at once. Our sight 
would then be very like that faculty of perceiving colors 
by the points of the fingers, which some persons are said 
to possess. In that case, seeing would only be a nicer kind 
of groping, and our eyes would be more conveniently fixed 
on the points of our fingers; or, as with many insects, on 
the ends of long antennae. Such a form of eye is precisely 
suited to the wants of an animal which has not an idea 
beyond its food, which has no business with any object too 
large for its mouth, and whose great concern is to stick to 
a rock and catch whatever animalculae the water floats 
within the grasp of its feelers. But for a being whose 
intercourse should be with all the works of God, and whose 
chief end in such intercourse should be to behold the 
Creator reflected in his works, it was manifestly necessary 
to have a wider and larger range of vision ; and, therefore, 
a different form of eye. Both these objects, breadth of 
field combined with length of range, are obtained by plac- 
ing the optic nerve at the back of the eye, and interposing 
several lenses, through which objects are observed. By 
this arrangement a visual angle is secured, and all objects 
lying within it are distinctly visible at the same time. 
This faculty of perceiving several objects at the same time 
is a ^pyeial property of sight which tends greatly to en- 
large our conceptions of the knowledge of Him who gave 
it. A man who never saw can have no idea of it. He can 
not taste two separate tastes at once, nor smell two distinct 
smells at once ; nor feel more than one object with each 
hand at once ; and if he hears several sounds at the same 
time, they either flow into each other, making a harmony, 
or confuse him with their discord. Yet we are all con- 



26 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



scious that we see a vast variety of distinct and separate 
objects at one glance of our eyes. I think it is manifest 
that the Former of such an eye not only intended its 
owner to observe such a vast variety of objects, but from 
the capacity of his own sight to infer the vastly wider range 
of vision of Him who gave it. 

Besides the breadth of the field of vision, we also require 
length of range for the purpose of life. The thousand 
inconveniences which the short-sighted man so painfully 
feels are obvious to all. Yet it may tend to reconcile such 
to their lot to know that thousands of the liveliest and 
merriest of God's creatures can not see an inch before them. 
Small birds and insects, which feed on very minute insects, 
need eyes like microscopes to find them ; while the eagle 
and the fish- hawk, which soar up till they are almost out 
of sight, can distinctly see the hare or the herring a mile 
below them, and so must have eyes like telescopes. We, 
too, need to observe minute objects very closely, as when 
we read fine print, or when a lady threads a fine needle at 
microscope range ; but, if confined to that range, we could 
not see our friends across the room, or find our way to the 
next street. Again, in traveling we need to see objects 
miles away, and at night we see the stars millions of miles 
away ; but then, if confined to the long range, we should be 
strangers at home, and never get within a mile of any ac- 
quaintance. Now, how to combine these two powers, of 
seeing near objects and distant ones with the same eye, is 
the problem which the Maker of the eye had to solve. 
Let us look how man tried to solve it. A magnifying lens 
will collect the rays from any distant object, and convey 
them to a point called the focus. Then suppose we put 
this glass in the tube of an opera-glass, or pocket spy-glass, 
and look through the eye -hole and the concave lens, 
properly adjusted, in front of it, we shall see the image of 
the object considerably magnified. But suppose the object 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



27 



draws very near, we see nothing distinctly ; for the rays re- 
flected from it, which were nearly parallel while it was at 
a distance, are no longer so when it comes near, but scatter 
in all directions, and those which fall on the lens are 
collected at a point much nearer to the lens than before, 
and the eye-glass must be pushed forward to that focus. 
Accordingly, you know that the spy-glass is made to slide 
back and forward, and the telescope has a screw to 
lengthen or shorten the tube according to the distance of 
the objects observed. Another way of meeting the case 
would be by taking out the lens, and putting in one of 
less magnifying power, a flatter lens, for the nearer object. 
Now, at first sight, it would seem a very inconvenient 
thing to have eyes drawing out and in several inches like 
spy-glasses, and still more inconvenient to have twenty or 
thirty pairs of eyes, and to need to take out our eyes, 
and put in a new set twenty times a day. The ingenuity 
of man has been at work hundreds of years to discover 
some other method of adapting an optical instrument to 
long and short range, but without success Now, the 
Former of the eye knew the properties of light and the 
properties of lenses before the first eye was made ; he knew 
the mode of adjusting them for any distance, from the 
thousands of millions of miles between the eye and the star, 
to the half-inch distance of the mote in the sunbeam; and 
he had not only availed himself of both the principles 
which opticians discovered, but has executed his work 
with an infinite perfection which bungling men may 
admire, but can never imitate. The sclerotic coat of the 
eye, and the choroid which lies next it, are full of muscles 
which, by their contraction, both press back the crystalline 
lens nearer the retina, and also flatten it; the vitreous 
humor, in which the crystalline lens lies, a fine, trans- 
parent humor, about as thick as the white of an egg, giving 
way behind it, and also slightly altering its form and 



23 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



power of refraction to suit the case. Thus, that which the 
astronomer, or the microscopist, performs by a tedious pro- 
cess, and then very imperfectly, we perform perfectly, 
easily, instantly, and almost involuntarily, with that perfect 
compound microscope and telescope invented by the 
Former of the human eye. Surely, in giving us an instru- 
ment so admirably fitted for observing the lofty grandeur 
of the heavens and the lowlier beauties of the earth, he 
meant to allure us to the discovery of the perfections of 
the great Designer and Former of all these wondrous works. 

But there is another contrivance in the eye, adapted to 
lead us further to the consideration of the extent of the 
knowledge of its power. We are placed in a world of 
variable lights, of day and night, and of all the variations 
between light and darkness. "We can not see in the full 
blaze of light, nor yet in utter darkness. Had the eye 
been formed to bear only the noonday glare, we had been 
half blind in the afternoon, and wholly so in the evening. 
If the eye were formed so as to see at night, we had been 
helpless as owls in the day. But the variations of light 
in the atmosphere may be in some measure compensated* 
as we know, by regulating the quantity admitted to our 
houses — shutting up the windows. When we wish to reg- 
ulate the admission of light to our rooms, we have recourse 
to various clumsy contrivances j paper blinds, perpetually 
tearing, sunblind rollers that will not roll, Venetian blinds 
continually in need of mending, awnings blowing away with 
every storm, or shutters, which shut up and leave us in en- 
tire darkness. A self-acting window, which shall expand 
with the opening of light in the mornings and evenings, 
and close up of its own accord as the light increases toward 
noon, has never been manufactured by man. But the 
Former of the eye took note of the necessities and con- 
veniences of the case, and besides giving a pair of shutters 
to clo.se up when we go to sleep, he has given the most 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



29 



admirable sunblinds ever invented. The nerve of the eye 
at the back of its chamber can not see without light, and 
its light comes through the little round window called the 
pupil, or black of the eye — which is simply a hole in the 
iris, or colored part. Now this iris is formed of two sets 
of muscles: one set of elastic rings, which, when left to 
themselves, contract the opening; and another set at right 
angles to them, like the spokes of a wheel, pulling the 
inner edge of the iris in all directions to the outside. In 
fact it is not so much a sunblind, as a self-acting window, 
opening and closing the aperture according to our need of 
light, and doing this so instantaneously that we are not 
sensible of the process. 

It is self-evident that the Maker of such an eye was ac- 
quainted with the properties of light, and the alternations 
of night and day, as well as with the mechanical contriv- 
ances for adjusting the eye to these variable circumstances. 
He has given us an eye capable of seeking knowledge 
among partial darkness, and of availing itself for this 
purpose of imperfect light; an apt symbol of our mental 
constitution and moral situation in a world where good 
and evil, light and darkness, mix and alternate. 

Perhaps some one is ready to ask, What is the use of 
so many lenses in the eye ? It seems as if the crystalline 
lens and the optic nerve were sufficient for the purpose of 
sight, with the cornea simply to protect them. What is 
the use of the aqueous humor and the vitreous humor? 

Light, when refracted through the lens, becomes sepa- 
rated into its component colors — red, yellow, green, blue, 
and violet; and the greater the magnifying power of the 
lens, and the brighter the object viewed, the greater the 
dispersion of the rays. So that if the crystalline lens of 
the eye alone were used, we should see every white object 
bluish in the middle, and yellowish and reddish at the 
edges; or, in vulgar language, we should see starlight. 



30 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



This difficulty perplexed Sir Isaac Newton all his life, 
and lie never discovered the mode of making a refracting 
telescope which would obviate it. But M Dolland, an op- 
tician, reflecting that the very same difficulty must have 
presented itself to the Maker of the eye, determined to 
ascertain how he had obviated it. He found that the Maker 
of the eye had a knowledge of the fact that different sub- 
stances have different powers of refracting or bending the 
rays of light which pass through them, and that liquids 
have generally a different power of refraction from solids. 
For instance, if you put a straight stick in water, the part 
under water will seem bent at a considerable angle, while 
if you put the stick through a little hole in a pane 
of glass it will not seem so much bent. He further dis- 
covered that oil of cassia had a different power of refrac- 
tion from water, and the white of an egg still a different 
power. He discovered also that the first lens of the eye, 
the aqueous humor, is very like water; that the crystalline 
lense is a firm jelly, and that the vitreous humor is about 
the consistency of the white of an egg. The combination 
of these three lenses, of different powers of refraction, 
secures the correction of their separate errors. He could 
not make telescope lenses of jelly, nor water; therefore, 
he could not make a perfect achromatic telescope, but he 
learned the lesson of mutual compensations of difficulties 
which the Maker of the eye teaches the reflecting anato- 
mist, and procuring flint and crown glass of different de- 
grees of refraction, he arranged them in the achromatic 
lens so as nearly to remedy the defect. 

I think that you will at once admit that Dolland's at- 
tempt to remedy the evils of confused sight in the telescope 
indicated a desire to obtain a precise and correct view of 
the objects ; and that his success in constructing an instru- 
ment, nearly perfect, for the use of astronomers, gave evi- 
dence that he himself had a clear idea of that perfect and 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF ? 



31 



accurate vision which he thus attempted to bestow on 
them. Shall we then imagine any inaccuracy in the sight 
of Him, who not only desired, but executed and bestowed 
on us, an instrument so perfectly adapted to the imperfec- 
tions of this lower world, and whose very imperfections 
are the materials from which he produces clear and perfect 
vision ? No ! in God's eye there are no chromatic refrac- 
tions of passions, or prejudice, or party feeling, or self- 
love. He sees no reflected or refracted light. Father 
of Light! with whom is no variableness, or shadow of 
turning, open our eyes to behold Thee clearly ! 

Our text thus leads us to a knowledge of God's charac- 
ter, from the structure of the bodies he has given us. He 
that formed my eye sees. Though my feeble vision is by 
no means a standard or limit for his Omniscience, yet I 
may conclude that every perfection of the power of sight 
he has given me existed previously in him. Has he en- 
dowed me, a poor puny mortal, the permanent tenant of 
only two yards of earth, with an eye capable of ranging over 
earth's broad plains and lofty mountains, of traversing her 
beauteous lakes and lovely rivers, of scanning her crowded 
cities, and inspecting all their curious productions, and 
specially delighting to investigate the bodily forms of men, 
and their mental characters displayed on the printed page ? 
Has he given me the principle of curiosity, without which 
such an endowment were useless ? Then most undoubted- 
ly he has Himself both the desire to observe all the works 
of his hands, and the power to gratify that desire. The 
Former of the eye must of necessity be the great Observer. 

Wheresoever an eye is found of his handiwork, and where- 
soever sight is preserved by his skill, let the owner of such 
an instrument know that if he can see, God can, and as 
surely as he sees, God does. 

If it is possible for us to beheld many objects distinctly 
at once, it is not impossible for God to behold more. If 



32 



DID THE WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 



he has given us an eye to look from earth to heaven, then 
his eye sees from heaven to earth. If I can see accurately, 
(rod's inspection is much more impartial. And if he has 
given me the power of adjusting my imperfect vision to the 
varying lights and shades of this changing scene, let me 
not dream for a moment that he is destitute of a corre- 
sponding power of investigating difficulties, and penetra- 
ting darknesses, and bringing to 1 ight hidden works and secret 
things. God is light. In him is no darkness at all. 
Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his 
sight, hut all things are naked and opened to the eyes of 
him with whom I have to do. He has seen all my past 
life — my faults, my follies, and my crimes. "When I 
thought myself in darkness and privacy, God's eye was 
upon me there. In the turmoil of business, God's eye was 
upon me. In the crowd of my ungodly companions, God's 
eye was upon me. In the darkness and solitude of night, 
God's eye was upon me. And God's eye is on me now, 
and will follow me from this house, and will watch me and 
observe all my actions, on — on — on — while God lives, and 
wheresoever God's creation extends. 

" O God, Thou has searched and known me ; 
Thou knowest my down-sitting and mine uprising; 
Thou understandest my thoughts afar off. 
Thou compassest my path and my lying down, 
And art acquainted with all my ways. 
For there is not a word in my tongue, 
But, lo ! Lord, Thou knowest it altogether. 
Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand 
upon me. 

Such knowledge is too wonderful for me ! 
It is high, I can not attain unto it ; 
Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? 
And whither shall I flee from thy presence ? 



DID THE "WORLD MAKE ITSELF? 

If 1 ascend up into haaven, Thou art there, 
If I make my bed in hell, behold, Thou art there ! 
If I take the wings of the morning, 
I And dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, 
Even there shall thy hand lead me, 
And thy right hand shall hold me. 
If I say, 'Surely the darkness shall cover me,' 
Even the night shall be light about me j 
Yea the darkness hideth not from thee, 
But the night shineth as the day, 
The darkness and the light are both alike to Thee." 



CHAPTER II. 



"^AS JOUR yVLoTHEI^A ^VLoNKEY 



r 9 



In the previous chapter we saw the evidences of God's 
skill and wisdom in the adaptations of nature, fitting the 
organs of animals for hearing, walking, and eating, and 
especially in the structure of the human eye. This has 
long been owned by candid minds as an unanswerable ar- 
gument, demonstrating the being of God by the works of 
his hands. But since that chapter was written a school 
of scientists has arisen, of whom Mr. Darwin is at present 
the most popular, claiming to be able to show how all the 
species of living things can evolve, not only their eyes, but 
their legs and wings and lungs, and every part of them, 
from a little bit of primeval life stuff, called protoplasm, 
by the influence of Natural Selection. Mr. Darwin owns 
that the formation of an eye is rather a tough job for a 
little pin-point germ of protoplasm ; but he has no doubt 
that it has been done, and he writes several books to show 
us how. "We propose to look into this self-evolving pro- 
cess, as he and his brother evolutionists describe their 
theory. 

It is necessary, right here at the outset, to distinguish 
the theory of the evolutionists from the great fact of evo- 
lution. Almighty God created the world, not only for 
his own pleasure, but also for his own glory, that men and 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



35 



angels might learn to know him by his works. Creation is 
thus God's great object lesson for men and angels to learn. 
But learning is a process, gradual, slow, from one step to 
another. Therefore the object lesson must not be precip- 
itated all in a heap upon the infantile intellects of the 
learners, but unfolded by degrees. Geologists assure us 
that so it was in the past; that first the lifeless strata were 
deposited ; next, light was evolved ; afterward, fishes, and 
marine reptiles, and birds ; then came the carboniferous or 
plant era; afterward the mammalia; last of all man. 
You observe here an ascending scale of creation, beginning 
with first principles and simple forms, and ascending to 
the most complicated ; a series of experiments in God's 
great lecture-room, illustrative of the various steps of the 
evolution of the divine idea. But six thousand years be- 
fore geology was born Moses described this same evolution 
of creation, in the first chapter of Genesis. As he could 
not have learned it from any science known in his day, God 
Himself must have shown it to him. 

The divine idea is still in process of evolution for our 
instruction. We behold it in the continual formation of 
new strata by the destruction of the old ; in the chemical 
combinations of the elements of the air, sea, and earth; in 
the evolution of the grass from the seed, and of the oak 
from the acorn ; in the development of the insect germ 
into the caterpillar, and the butterfly; in the hatching of 
the egg into the chicken ; and in the growth of the infant 
into the man. We observe also a divine development of 
society, an advance of civilization, a providential guidance 
of history, and a fall and disorder among mankind, with a 
process of redemption, medical, educational, political and 
religious, for the human race. The whole process, there- 
fore, of the creation, natural history, and moral government 
of the world, is the development of a divine idea, according 
to a divine plan, by the direct or mediate efficacy of divine 



36 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



power, for the accomplishment of the divine purpose as 
revealed to us in the divine word, the Holy Scriptures. 
Galen taught that the study of physiology was a divine 
hymn. This divine development is to be clearly and 
sharply distinguished from the atheistic theory of evolu- 
tion. They differ in the following particulars : 

1. The divine development of the world is a great fact; 
the theory of atheistic evolution is only a baseless theory, 
a fiction. 

2. The divine development begins in the beginning, with 
God, creating the heavens and the earth; but the theory of 
atheistic evolution has no beginning, asserting the eternal 
existence of a changing world. 

3. The divine development is the unfolding of an intel- 
ligent plan, showing the adaptation of means to ends for 
the accomplishment of a purpose ; the atheistic theory of 
evolution denies plan, purpose, adaptation and final cause. 

4. The divine development is conducted, and continually 
reinforced by the will of the Omnipotent God ; the athe- 
istic development evolves only the forces of matter. 

5. The divine development has a moral character, and 
terminates in the highest holiness and happiness of all 
obedient men and angels; but the atheistic development 
contemplates and promises only the evolution of animal in- 
stinct and passions, the eternal death of the individual, and, 
for the universe, only purposeless cycles of progress, and 
catastrophies of ruin. 

In this chapter we discuss only the theory of atheistic 
evolution. In the discussion of all questions affecting 
human life it is advantageous to trace them to their origin, 
and to follow them out to their practical results. Thus we get 
a clear view of the whole subject, and are enabled to assign to 
it its proper influence. It is also a great benefit to the mass 
of mankind to conduct such discussions in plain language, 
and to translate the roundabout phrases, and the Latinized 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



37 



words of scientific men, as much as we can, into the vulgar 
tongue ; to state the subjects of discussion so as to be 
understood of the people. So we shall put the whole busi- 
ness of Darwinism and development before you, reader, in 
a nutshell, by simply asking you the question at the head 
of this chapter, " Was your mother a monkey?" 
' What a question ! 

Well, then, your grandmother? her grandmother? or 
does it seem less offensive, or more likely to you to go 
back some thousands of years, and say your forefathers 
were apes ? 

That is exactly what Mr. Darwin says when we translate 
his scientific language into the vulgar tongue : "The early 
progenitors of man were no doubt once covered with hair, 
both sexes having beards ; their ears were pointed and 
capable of movement ; and their bodies were provided 
with a tail having the proper muscles. The foot, judging 
from thccondition of the great toe in the foetus, was then 
prehensile , and our progenitors, no doubt, were arboreal 
in their habits, frequenting some warm forest-clad land. 
The males were provided with gfleat canine teeth, which 
served them as formidable weapons."* This ancient form 
"if seen by a naturalist, would undoubtedly have been 
ranked as an ape or a monkey. And as man, under a gene- 
alogical point of view, belongs to the Catarhine or Old 
World stock (of monkeys), we must conclude, however 
much the conclusion may revolt pur pride, that our early 
progenitors would have been properly thus designated."")* 
So here you have your genealogy, name and thing fully 
described. Mr. Darwin thinks it is quite an honorable pedi- 
gree : " Thus we have given to man a pedigree of prodig- 
ious length, but not, it may be said, of noble quality. * * * 

*The Descent of Man, p. 198, American Edition. 
tThe Descent of Man, p. 191, Am. Ed. 



38 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



Unless we willfully close our eyes, we may, with our pres- 
ent knowledge, approximately recognize our parentage, nor 
need we feel ashamed of it. The most humble organism 
is something much higher than the inorganic dust under 
our feet ; and no one with an unbiased mind can study 
any living creature, however humble, without being struck 
with enthusiasm at its marvelous structure and properties."* 
There are people, however, who do not grow enthusiastic 
at the idea of their long-tailed progenitors ; but there is 
no accounting for taste in such matters ! 

For elderly people, who do not take so enthusiastically 
to monkeys as his junior readers, Mr. Darwin has provided 
a rather less gymnastic ancestry. How would you like to 
have a fish for your forefather? If it were one of Nep- 
tune's noble tritons, or the Philistine fish-god, Dagon, or a 
mermaid, it might not be so repulsive as the ape ; or even 
a twenty-pound salmon, flashing its silver and blue in the 
sunlight as it spins the line off the reel, might not be so 
utterly disgusting as the monkey burlesque of humanity. 
But, alas ! Mr. Darwin has been sent to this proud 
nineteenth century as the prophet to teach us humility, 
and here is the scientific statement of the structure of our 
fishy forefathers: "At a still earlier period the progen- 
itors of man must have been aquatic in their habits, for 
morphology plainly tells us that our lungs consist of a 
modified swim bladder which once served as a float. These 
early predecessors of man thus seen in the dim recesses of 
time must have been as lowly organized as the lancelot or 
amphibioxus, or even still more lowly organized."* 

That certainly is a very humble origin. We are not, 
however, by any means to the end of our pedigree. Mr. 
Darwin says that your codfish arist >cracy are descended 
from a race of squirts — the squirts which you picked up on 

^Descent of Man, p. 199, Am. Ed. 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



39 



the shore and squeezed, when you were a boy, discharging 
these primitive Babcock Extinguishers upon your playfel- 
lows, irreverently regardless of the harm done the poor 
squirt, the ancestor of the human race. If you doubt it, 
here is the latest deliverance of infallible science upon the 
subject. He describes the Ascidians : "They hardly ap- 
pear like animals, and consist of a simple tough leathery 
sack, with two small projecting orifices. They belong to 
the Molluscoida of Huxley, a lower division of the great 
family of the Mollusca ; but they have recently been placed 
by some naturalists among the vermes or worms. Their 
larvae somewhat resemble tadpoles in shape, and have the 
power of swimming freely about. * * * "We should 
thus be justified in believing that, at an extremely remote 
period, a group of animals existed resembling in many re- 
spects the larvae of our present Ascidians, which diverged 
into two great branches, the cne retrograding in develop- 
ment and producing the present class of Ascidians, the 
other rising to the crown and summit of the animal king- 
dom, by giving birth to the vertebrata."* Thus it appears 
that Mr. Darwin deduces his origin, and that of mankind 
in general, from one of these Ascidians, or, in plain English, 
makes them a race of squirts. 

The notion of evolution is a belief that all living beings, 

O CD / 

plants as well as animals, have not been created, but, like 
Topsy, just grew, from the very smallest germs or spores. 
Evolutionists inform us that all kinds of organisms have 
been evolved from four or five primeval germs or spores; 
or more consistently with their great principle, that the 
simple gave birth to the differentiated, from one primeval 
germ or egg. Mr. Darwin alleges four or five primal 
forms, acknowledging that analogy would lead him up to 
one. But other members of this school consistently and 

■ Descent of Man, 197, Am. Ed. 



40 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



boldly follow up the stream to its fountain, and allege a 
single primeval living seed as the origin of all living things, 
and that this must have been a microscopic animalcule, or 
plant spore, of the very lowest order, which, multiplying 
its kind, gave birth to improved and enlarged offspring; 
and they, in their turn, grew, and multiplied, and differen- 
tiated into varieties; and so, in the course of endless ages, 
the poorer sorts perishing and the better sorts prospering? 
the world became filled with its existing populations, with- 
out any new creative acts of God, and without any particu- 
lar providential care over the new species. 

The particular process according to which this multipli- 
cation and improvement took place, Mr. Darwin calls 
Natural Selection. Every creature tends to increase and 
multiply; and the very slowest breeders would soon fill 
the earth, were their multiplication not checked by hunger, 
by the attacks of enemies, and by the struggle for exist- 
ence. But all are not born alike strong, or swift, or of 
the same color; some of the same brood are better fitted 
to escape enemies, or to fight the battle of life, than others. 
These will survive, while the weak ones perish. This Mr. 
Wallace calls, the survival of the fittest. They will trans- 
mit their superior size, or swiftness, or better color, or 
whatever superiority they possess, to their offspring. The 
process will go on in successive generations, each add- 
ing an infinitesimal quantity to the stock gained by the 
past generation; just as breeders of improved stock in- 
crease the weight of cattle by breeding from the largest; 
or breeders of race-horses increase the speed by breeding 
from the swiftest. In this way varieties from the same 
family will grow into different species. And, as only those 
differences which are beneficial to the animal are preserved, 
they will grow into improved species; and, as variations of 
all sorts take place, so all sorts of varieties and species 
arise in process of time. All will thus tend to perfect 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



41 



themselves according to the laws of nature, and without 
any special oversight or care of God, or of anybody but 
Natural Selection ; which Mr. Darwin takes special care to 
describe as an unintelligent selector. He defines the na- 
ture which selects to be " the aggregate action and product 
of natural laws," and these laws are "the sequences of 
events as ascertained by us." He ridicules the idea of 
God's special endowment of the fantail pigeon with addi- 
tional feathers, or of the bull dog's jaws with strength, 
and says, " But if we give up the principle in the one case, 
if we do not admit that the variations of the primeval dog 
were intentionally guided in order, for instance, that the 
greyhound, that perfect image of symmetry and vigor, 
might be formed; no shadow of reason can be assigned for 
the belief that variations alike in nature, and the results of 
the same general laws which have been the groundwork 
through Natural Selection of the most perfectly adapted 
animals in the world, man included, were intentionally and 
specially guided."* This, then, is the grand distinctive 
difference of Mr. Darwin's mode of producing the various 
animals; namely, that it is unintelligent, their variations 
are not designed nor intended by the Creator, but they are 
the results of a method of trial and error, producing a hit- 
and-miss pattern. The failures all perish, and the successes 
live and prosper; but there is no intentional or special 
guidance of God in the business. And the business in- 
cludes the whole process of peopling the globe, from the 
creation of the first four or five germs down to the last 
formation of human society. God is thus dismissed from 
the greatest part of the world's life, including all human 
affairs. This is not exactly atheism in theory, but practic- 
ally it amounts to much the same thing. 

It is this excommunication of God's agency from the 

*The Variations of Animals, etc., Vol. II. page 515. 



42 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



management of the world, and especially from human af- 
fairs, by Mr. Darwin's method, which has so commended 
his books to the ungodly world. There is a general agree- 
ment among this class of writers, that Mr. Darwin has de- 
stroyed the basis of the argument for the being of God 
from design as displayed in the adaptations of birds and 
beasts to their conditions. Mr. Huxley says that "when 
he first read Mr. Darwin's book, what struck him most for- 
cibly was the conviction that teleology, as commonly under- 
stood, had received its death blow at 3Ir. Darwin's hands."* 
" For the notion that every organism has been created as it 
is, and launched straight at a purpose, Mr. Darwin substi- 
tutes the conception of something which may fairly be 
termed a method of trial and error. Organisms vary in- 
cessantly; of these variations the few meet with surround- 
ing conditions which suit them and thrive ; the many are 
unsuited and become extinguished. * * * For the 
teleologist (the Christian) an organism exists, because it was 
made for the conditions in which it was found. For the 
Darwinian an organism exists, because out of many of its 
kind it is the only one which has been able to persist in 
the conditions in which it was found. * * * If we ap- 
prehend the spirit of the Origin of Species rightly, then 
nothing can be more entirely and absolutely opposed to 
teleology, as it is commonly understood, than the Darwinian 
theory. ''j Prof. Haeckel argues to the same purpose that 
Darwin's theory leads inevitably to Atheism and Material- 
ism. Dr. Buchner says of Darwin's theory, "It is the 
most thoroughly naturalistic that can be imagined, and far 
more atheistic than that of his decried predecessor, La- 
marck." Carl Vogt also commends it because "It turns the 
Creator, and his occasional intervention in the revolution 
of the earth and in the production of species, without any 

*Lay Sermons, p. 30. 
f Lay Sermons, 303. 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY? 



43 



hesitation out of doors, inasmuch as it does not leave the 
smallest room for the agency of such a Being. The first 
living germ being granted, out of it the creation develops 
itself progressively by Natural Selection, through all the 
geologic periods of our planet, by the simple law of de- 
scent. No new species arise by creation, and none perishes 
by annihilation ; the natural cause of things, the process of 
evolution of all organisms, and of the earth itself, is of 
itself sufficient for the production of all we see. Thus man 
is not a special creation, produced in a different way, and 
distinct from other animals, endowed with an individual 
soul, and animated by the breath of G-od; on the contrary, 
man is only the highest product of the progressive evolu- 
tion of animal life, springing from the group of apes next 
below him."* 

Whether, therefore, Mr. Darwin himself intends his 
theory to be atheistic or not, it has had the misfortune to 
be so viewed by the greater number of its supporters; and, 
accordingly, it is this view of it which we shall keep prom- 
inent in the following discussion. Mr. Darwin does un- 
doubtedly intend his theory to be antagonistic to the Bible 
account of creation and providence, and an improvement 
upon it; and, whether atheistic or not, it is undoubtedly 
anti-Christian. 

I. The History of the Theory. 

The first thing which strikes a common person on first 
hearing this theory is that it is a very queer notion for any 
Christian man to invent. "We are naturally curious to 
know how a man, educated in a Christian country, could 
have fallen into it. But it is, in fact, no new discovery, 
but an old heathen superstition. Some four hundred years 
before Christ, when the world had almost wholly apostatized 

♦Cited by Hodge in " What is Darwinism ? " Page 73, etc. 



44 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



into idolatry, Democritus, among the Greeks, became of- 
fended with the vulgar heathen gods, and set himself to 
invent a plan of the world without them. From Eastern 
travelers the Greeks knew that the Brahmins, in India, 
had a theory of the world developing itself from a pri- 
meval egg. He set himself to refine upon it, and imagined 
virtually the Nebular Hypothesis. He said that all mat- 
ter consisted of very small atoms, dancing about in all di- 
rections, from all eternity, and which at last happened into 
the various forms of the present world. 

The ancient Phoenicians held a theory that all life was 
from the sea; and that, as the wet mud produces all sorts 
of herbs in spring now, so originally it produced all man- 
ner of animals. They worshiped it as a god, and called 
it Mot, or Mud. Anaximander took up the theory and 
carried it out in true Darwinian style, alleging that the 
first men sprang from the ground watered by the sea, and 
that they had spines like sea urchins; evidently deriving 
them from the Radiates. Lucretius still further developed 
the theory in a poem in six books. The spread of Chris- 
tianity, however, hindered the spread of the doctrine, as 
Mr. Tyndall feelingly laments, until the Saracens over- 
spread the East, when some of them, it seems, favored it. 
Rut it seems to be an unlucky dogma, since, with the down- 
fall of the power of the false prophet, the anti-Christian 
form of science went down again. 

The dogma of the transmutation of species reappeared, 
however, in the Romish Church in a religious form; the 
old heathenism, which had never been wholly banished 
from the minds of men, thus reasserting itself. About the 
tenth century some began to teach that the bread of the 
communion of the Lord's Supper was transubstantiated, 
and the wine also, into the body, and blood, and soul, and 
divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is probably the 
most complete transmutation of species which has ever been 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



45 



imagined or described. The evolution of bread into Deity 
is only equaled by Mr. Tyndall's endowment of matter 
with all the potencies of life and thought; a miracle dif- 
fering from the popish transubstantiation only in the ele- 
ment of time, but in its essential nature equally supernatu- 
ral. The dogma excited great discussion for centuries, and 
produced as many theories of transubstantiation as we now 
observe of evolution, keeping philosophic minds and pens 
busy till the dawn of modern science after the Reforma- 
tion. 

La Place threw out the Nebular Hypothesis, which is 
substantially Democritus' concourse of atoms, only La Place 
endeavored to substitute circular motions under the law of 
gravitation, instead of Democritus' chance arrangement, as 
a sufficient cause for the formation and motions of planets, 
flerschel's discovery of the nebulae was hastily laid hold 
of by a number of writers, and notably by the author of 
the Vestiges of Creation, as furnishing the primeval 
matter necessary for world-making; and till the spectro- 
scopic discoveries of the composite nature of gaseous neb- 
ulae, they were claimed as specimens of worlds in process 
of formation. La Place supposed his nebulous matter to 
be gas in a state of white-heat combustion, compared with 
which the heat of the hottest fire would be a cool bath. In 
no other way could he dissipate the world's substance into 
sufficient thinness for his vortices. But Spencer saw that 
this tremendous heat would be fatal to all forms of life, and 
especially to sensitive beings; and Tyndall shows us that this 
original matter must have had all the potencies of life and 
sensation, and a potency ''of sensation means being able to 
feel. Now the worst fate threatened against sinners in the 
Bible is a place in the lake burning with fire and brimstone, 
which burns at 500° Fahrenheit; but the temperature of 
the original fire-mist was a thousand times hotter. Some 
of these scientists call such a fate as the Bible threatens 



46 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



imainst the wicked, cruel. But here is a hell manufactured 
by the evolutionists infinitely worse than that of the Bible ; 
for the hell of the Bible is only for the wicked, but the 
evolutionists' hell is indiscriminately for all, saints and sin- 
ners, and all sorts of creatures, innocent as babes unborn 
of tnj crime; yet they, or, which is the same thing, the 
matter containing all the potency of their sensations, that 
is their power of feeling, were born in this hell, and kept 
in it from all eternity, until it pleased the evolutionists to 
begin to cool it down a little. However, it was rather 
scientific than benevolent reasons which induced Mr. Spen- 
cer to reverse the order of procedure, and make his star 
iust cold to begin with, and to heat it up by condensation 
and pressure to about the temperature of molten iron; 
which was still an uncomfortably warm lodging for Mr. 
Tyndall's potencies of sensation for some millions of years. 
The division of opinion about the original nebulae, how- 
ever, still prevails; some evolutionists of the old-fashioned 
order still taking their nebulae hot, while others, with 
Spencer, prefer it cold, with star dust. 

As to the Spontaneous Generation of life, there has been 
less progress of opinion, though great variety has been 
exhibited. Ovid and Yirgil describe the way in which a 
carcass produces bees. It was generally believed that 
putrid meat produced the maggots, till the blow-flies were 
discovered laying their eggs. Then it was alleged that the 
entozoa, the worms found in the bodies of animals, were 
self-produced, without eggs, until the microscope discovered 
that one could lay 60,000 eggs. Strauss, however, adhered 
to the idea that as the tapeworm, as he supposed, was self- 
produced, so man was originated by the primeval slime. 
So also Professor Yogt, and M. Tremaux develop their 
animals from the land, and the latter accounts for their 
various qualities from the various qualities of their re- 
spective birthplaces, the crop being conditioned by the 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY? 



47 



soil. But Mr. Darwin derives all his organisms from the 
sea. Electricity in its galvanic form was for a while the 
agent to fire the earthly or marine mud with the vital spark ; 
and Mr. Crosse's experiments were supposed instances of 
the creation of acarii or mites in the battery bath, until it 
was found that the bath contained eggs and the electricity 
only hatched them. Some English evolutionists still ad- 
here to the theory of Spontaneous Generation, but the 
leading Germans deny, any instance of it being known. 
Huxley denies that any case of it has been established as 
now practicable ; but supposes that if we could have been 
present at the beginning of the world, when all the ele- 
ments were young and vigorous, we should have seen the 
chemical elements of the earth and air combining to form 
living beings, by the mere powers of their nature. If that 
were the fact, it would be a fact unique and unparalleled, 
utterly out of the course of nature, and so as contrary to 
the theory of evolution as if these living beings had been 
inspired with life by Almighty God. 

So the theory here again is divided. Two utterly irre- 
concilable ideas of the origin of life claim our belief — the 
theories of Biogenesis, and of ^.biogenesis, the one says 
all life is from the egg, and has always been so ; and so we 
have an eternal begetting of finite creatures ; the other al- 
leges the spontaneous beginning of plants and animals; a 
fact, if it be a fact, as unparalleled as creation, and far 
more miraculous. 

As to the history of the progress of the germs of plants 
and animals thus produced, we find still greater diversities 
of opinion, not only as to details, but as to principles. Each 
inventor has added to, or altered, the original idea of evo- 
lution, until it has been burdened with more improvements 
and new patents than the sewing machine ; only the evo- 
lutionary improvements bid fair to improve the theory out 
of existence. We have seen M. Tremaux, with the au- 



48 



WAS TOCR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



tochthonic Athenians, deriving the powers of improve- 
ment of plants and animals from their native soils. La- 
marck on the contrary, inspired all his plants and animals : — 
fungi and frogs, and elephants and apes — with the desire of 
getting on in the world and improving their limbs by exer- 
cise ; so the greyhound grew slim and fleet by running ; the 
giraffe's neck elongated by reaching up to the branches of 
the trees on which it browsed, and the duck acquired web 
feet by swimming. Others attributed the evolution of dif- 
ferences to external conditions. The negro became black 
by exposure to the tropical sun ; the arctic hare received 
its coat of thick white fur from the cold climate, and the 
buffalo and camel their humps of fat from the sterility of 
their pastures at certain seasons, and the consequent need 
of a reserved store of fat for food for the rest of the body. 
Mr. Darwin's doctrine of Natural Selection refuses La- 
marck's notion of any conscious attempt of the plant or ani- 
mal at improvement; and equally denies the power of ex- 
ternal nature to improve anything, except by killing off 
poor specimens, save in that very limited range where good 
pastures make fat animals for a season or two. An innate 
power of accidental variation to a very small amount, and 
the slow but constant adding up of profitable variations 
during countless generations, with the killing off of the un- 
improved breeds by Natural Selection, is his patervt popula- 
tor and improver. But this theory is too slow for the nine- , 
teenth century, and so neither Huxley, nor Parsons, nor 
Mivart, nor even Wallace, accepts the doctrine as Darwin 
propounds it It is, in fact, already becoming unpopular 
among scientific men. Lyell proposed the origination of 
new species by leaps; as we see great geniuses born of 
commonplace parents; and Huxley supports that opinion, 
and Parsons, Owen and Mivart coincide in this inexplicable 
explanation. The author of the Yestiges of Creation 
accounts for improved species from a prolongation of the 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



19 



period of gestation. But Hyatt and Cope derive them from 
quite the contrary process — accelerated development of 
gestation. MM. Ferris and Kolliker derive them from par- 
thenogenesis, a mode of genesis of which our world oilers 
no example whatever. 

The origin of man, with all his mental powers and 
religious aspirations, is the great difficulty. Mr. Mivart 
excludes man wholly from the influence of Natural 
Selection, from the time he acquired a soul. Mr. Wal- 
lace, rejecting the action of one Supreme Intelligence 
for everything but the origin of universal forces and 
laws, "Contemplates the possibility that the development 
of the essentially human portions of man's structure and 
intellect may have been determined by the directing in- 
fluence of some higher intelligent beings acting through 
natural and universal laws ; "* i. e., the gods of the old 
heathen nations. And so after twenty-two centuries wan- 
dering over the world, we have got back to where Democ- 
ritus started from— to pure old heathenism. 

After such a history of the theory of evolution, and in 
presence of such contradictory presentations by its advo- 
cates, I need scarcely say that it is by no means an estab- 
lished scientific principle, were it not for the insolent man- 
ner in which some of them assert it as scientifically demon- 
strated ; and denounce the Bible doctrine of creation as mere 
superstition, "A featherbed of respectable and respected 
tradition," and warn off Christians from any attempt to inves- 
tigate theories of cosmogony; and overbear the ignorant by 
the array of the names of men of science who give their sanc- 
tion to some phase of the theory. But let it be borne in 
mind that no well-established scientific principle, no de- 
monstrated law, exhibits such contradictory and conflicting 



Natural Selection, 372 A., Am. Ed. 
4 



50 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



phases as those we have just witnessed. The laws of grav- 
itation, or of chemical affinity, for instance, offer no such 
contradictions of their adherents; because they are founded 
on facts, while evolution is a mere notion, founded on ig- 
norance and error, as we shall presently see. Accordingly, 
by far the greater number of the greatest scientists oppose 
it, as utterly unscientific, and have recorded their opposi- 
tion, and the reasons for it. Sir John Herschel and Sir 
Wm. Thompson, among astronomers, have proclaimed its 
antagonism to the facts of physical astronomy. No new 
facts subversive of the foundations of faith in Grod as rec- 
ognized in the universe by Bacon, Newton, Boyle, Des- 
cartes, Leibnitz, Pascal, Paley and Bell, have been discov- 
ered by such scientists as Whewell, Sedgwick, Brewster, 
Faraday, Hugh Miller, or our American geologists, Daw- 
son, Hitchcock, and Dana. Nor have the deliberate and 
expanded demonstrations of its unscientific character by 
the late lamented Agassiz been ever fairly met, much less 
overturned. I refer to these honored names for the bene- 
fit of that large class who must take their science upon 
faith in some scientific prophet or apostle, in default of any 
possibility of personal investigation of the facts. Indeed, 
to the great majority, even of so-called scientific men, their 
science must be founded upon faith in the dogma of some 
scientific pope and council. And to such it may be reas- 
suring, amidst the evolutionists' cries of Science ! Science ! 
to know that a great many of the greatest scientists, in 
spite of all these confused assertions, do still believe in 
Almighty God, do call their souls their own, and hope 
when they die to go to heaven. 

As a specimen of the contempt in which this theory is 
held by the princes of science, read the following extract 
of an address by Agassiz, at a recent meeting of the Acad- 
emy of Science :* 

*Prom the Presbyterian, December 7, 1872. 



WAS YOUll MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



51 



"As I grow older in the ranks of science," said the pro- 
fessor, "I feel more and more the danger of stretching in- 
ferences from a few observations to a wide field. I see that 
the younger generation among naturalists are at this mo- 
ment falling into the mistake of making assertions and 
presenting views as scientific principles which are not even 
based upon real observation. I think it is time that some 
positive remonstrance be made against that tendency. The 
manner in wh'ch the evolution theory in zoology is treated 
would lead those who are not special zoologists to suppose 
that observations have been made by which it can be in- 
ferred that there is in nature such a thing as change among 
organized beings actually taking place. There is no such 
thing on record. It is shifting the ground from one field 
of observation to another to make this statement, and when 
the assertions go so far as to exclude from the domain of 
science those who will not be dragged into this mire of 
mere assertion, then it is time to protest. 

" He thought it was intolerant to say he was not on scien- 
tific grounds because he was not falling into the path which 
was occupied by those who maintain that all organized be- 
ings have been derived from a few original progenitors. 
Other supporters of the transmutation doctrine assume 
that they can demonstrate the changes to have taken place 
by .showing certain degrees of resemblance ; but what they 
never touch is the quality and condition of those few first 
progenitors from which they were evolved. They assume 
that they contained all that is necessary to evolve what ex- 
ists now. That is begging the question at the outset; for 
if these first prototypes contained the principle of evolu- 
tion, we should know something about them from observa- 
tion, and it should be shown that there are such organized 
beings as are capable of evolution. 

"I ask, Whence came these properties? If this power 
and capacity of change is not inherent to the first progen- 



52 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



itors, then I ask, Whence came the impulses by which 
those progenitors which have not this power of change in 
themselves acquire them? What is the power by which 
they are started in directions which are not determined by 
their primitive nature? From the total silence of the sup- 
porters of the transmutation theory on these and other 
points, he did not think it worth their while to take the 
slightest notice of this doctrine of evolution in his scientific 
considerations. He acknowledged what the evolutionists 
had done incidentally in scientific research; none had done 
more than Mr. Darwin. He believed he had been injured 
woefully by his adherents. He was a far better man than 
most of his school made him." 

It is to be acknowledged, however, that many scientists 
are evolutionists. Mr. Darwin is not alone in his belief. 
If he were, it would not be worth while to spend time in 
examining it. Quite a number of scientific men have fallen 
into it, and lecture and write commendations of it; and it 
has become quite popular among a certain class who do 
not like to accept the Bible doctrine that God created man } 
with its necessary consequence that the creature ought to 
obey his Creator; and they have proceeded to patch it out 
into completeness — for, as you observe, it is a little defec. 
tive ; like its own primeval squirt, it lacks a head and a 
tail — it has neither a beginning nor an end properly fitted 
to it. It takes a piece out of the middle of the universe 
from the management of Grod, but it leaves the beginning 
and the end totally unaccounted for; telling us neither 
whence came the first germs, nor whither tends the final 
fully developed angel. Mr. Darwin, though he calls one 
of his works, the Origin of Species, really avoids the 
question of origin. He admits the miracle of the creation 
of the four or five original germs of life, which, according 
to the evolutionists, is as unscientific as if he admitted four 
or five hundred. They desire to escape the operation of 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



53 



God altogether. Moreover, he gives no account of the 
origin of the law of heredity, by which each being pro- 
duces its like ; nor yet of the origin of the power of vari- 
ation, according to which profitable variations occur. Here, 
then, is still a field in which God reigns. But it is specially 
with Mr. Darwin's admission of the Creator to bestow the 
origin of life that evolutionists are displeased. If they 
admit God at the beginning of the world they see plainly 
that there is no possibility of getting rid of him afterward. 
Messrs. Huxley, Spencer, Tyndall, Buchner, Haeckel and 
Vogt combine their forces accordingly to evolve the world 
as we find it without God's intervention. 

Mr. Huxley, perceiving that to make either man, or 
monkey, or nomad, you must have materials, kindly brings 
a little pitcher of protoplasm, which he calls the physical 
basis of life. It is the meat our Caesar feeds on, and in- 
deed, for that matter, all living things. All vegetable and 
animal tissues are made up mostly of oxygen, hydrogen, 
carbon and nitrogen; and as the materials of which all liv- 
ing beings are built are the same originally, and are simply 
these chemical substances with a little iron, salt and lime, 
with their properties, he will have it that all life, includ- 
ing man's life and thought, is merely a development of 
protoplasm. This is the clay out of which all the various 
bricks, and tiles, and tea cups, and porcelain vases of the 
great world building are built. We don't need to begin 
with monkeys, nor fish, or pollywogs, now to develop into 
men, for we go down to the very bottom, since we have the 
stuff they all are made of, namely, protoplasm. Still this 
clay needs a potter to mold and bake it. 

The difficulty about the protoplasm is that it must be 
alive. You can not get a living pollywog, no more than a 
living elephant, out of dead protoplasm. Mr. Huxley 
shows very well that all protoplasm consists of the same 
materials j in fact, that all flesh is grass, as the Scripture 



54 WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 

says. The difficulty is how to convert the grass into flesh, 
unless by some animal eating it; or to convert the nitro- 
gen, carbon and water into grass or grain, or any other 
form of protein or protoplasm, without the previous action 
of some plant. In short, how are we to make the chemi- 
cal materials live? Here Mr. Tyndall comes in and en- 
dows the matter of the universe with life, and with all the 
potency of producing bodies and souls. In his famous 
Belfast Address he says: "Abandoning all disguise, the 
confession that I feel bound to make before you is that I 
prolong the vision backward, beyond the boundary of the 
experimental evidence, and discern in this matter, which 
we in our ignorance, and notwithstanding our professed 
reverence for its Creator, have hitherto covered with oppro- 
brium, the promise and potency of every form and quality 
of life." 

Yet, after all this marvelous endowment of matter with 
all potency, we have, not got quite back to the beginning. 
For still the questions arise, Where did this almighty mat- 
ter come from? Who endowed it with these wonderful 
potencies? And how does it happen to work so well, in such 
orderly and regular evolution of star dust, suns, planets, 
pollywogs, monkeys, men and maggots, in eternal cycles, 
ever advancing higher and doing better and better for the 
race, though poorly enough, it appears, for the miserable 
individuals? Here Buchner, Vogt, Spencer and other ma- 
terialists come in and perfect that which was lacking; show- 
ing how the star dust made itself, and how the paving stones 
made themselves, and are under no obligations to any Crea- 
tor but themselves. Matter and force are all they need, and 
endless time in which to work, and they will account for the 
universe without any Creator at all. Everything and every 
person must be just as it is, according to the regular oper- 
ation of the laws of Nature. 

As Buchner, Yogt and Spencer have given the system a 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY? 



55 



head, Lubbock, Evans and others have supplied it with a 
tail, and demonstrated how society, and morals, and r< 
ion have been excogitated by the apes out of their medi- 
tations in the forests. It is a fearful and wonderful account, 
they give us of the origin of marriage from the battles of 
the baboons, of the rights of property established by ter- 
rible fights for groves of good chestnuts, of the begin- 
nings of morals from the instincts of brutes, and of the 
dawnings of religion, or rather of superstition, from the 
dreams of these animals ; the result of the whole being 
that civilization, and society, and law, and order, and relig- 
ion, are all simply the evolution of the instincts of the 
brutes, and that there is no necessity for invoking any 
supernatural interference to produce them. The termina- 
tion of the whole, as far as you and 1 are concerned, is 
that "We shall fade away as the faint cloud melts into the 
blue ether," into the eternal sleep of death. 

. It thus appears that there is an orderly succession and 
attempted adjustment of one part of the doctrine of evo- 
lution to another, and that all the various workers are co- 
operating toward one grand result. It is true they differ 
widely in their professed religious creeds and political par- 
tialities. Mr. Darwin avows his belief in a Creator. Mr. 
Huxley votes on the London School Board for the intro- 
duction of the Bible into the public schools. Mr. Spencer 
is willing to allow the existence of some great unknowable 
mystery. Some of the French and German evolutionists 
dispense with any reference to God, as an unnecessary 
hypothesis. Others oppose the idea of God altogether, as 
inimical to progress. M. Comte proposed a worship of 
humanity. M. Strauss would worship the universe. But 
with all this variety of uniform, and armor, and ta 
the evolutionists are all soldiers of the same army, and 
all fighting the same great battle, for the brutal origin of 
man, and his independence of God. From which independ- 



56 



"WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



ence of God, and brutal origin of mankind, result very 
important consequences. For the belief of this notion 
necessarily destroys all faith in the Bible, and in the Chris- 
tianity which it reveals, and revolutionizes the basis of the 
civilization founded upon it, and all the laws protecting life, 
property, marriage and religion ; which laws are based upon 
the belief of maukind in the dignity of man, the sacred- 
ness of human life, and the sanction of morality by the 
All-seeing Judge of all the earth, who will reward every 
man according to his works. For all practical purposes it 
makes no great difference whether a man denies that there 
is any God at all, or admits that there is some kind of a 
god who created the world millions of years ago, and just 
set it a spinning to work out its destiny as best it might, 
but never after concerned himself about it, or its people, 
and never will; for nobody will ever trouble his head about 
a god who never troubles his head about him. 

Most of the evolutionists are zealous advocates of their 
system. These propagandists have had such a degree of 
success in attracting public attention, in inspiring a large 
proportion of the secular press, besides scientific journals, 
as advocates of their notions, and in obtaining entrance for 
them into the common school books, put into the hands of 
our children, and into massive quartos published by State 
legislatures with the money of Christian people, and in the 
prevalent corruption of public morals and breach of private 
trusts necessarily resulting from the evolution of these 
principles, that we are compelled, in self-defense, to exam- 
ine the doctrine of evolution. It is all very well for Mr. 
Tyndall to warn off everybody, but evolutionists, from any 
investigations into cosmogony ; about which he owns that 
they know very little now, and will not know much for 
some millions of years to come. But common people, who 
will not live so long, but who in the meantime have to live 
and make money, and save it, who have children to rear, 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



57 



and houses which they do not want burned over their heads, 
who have taxes to pay, increasing every year, and public 
plunderers to prosecute, and whose ballots may be asked 
one of these days for the substitution of the communes of 
the original apes, and the lied Republic for these United 
States, all upon the alleged scientific proof for the truth of 
the doctrine of evolution, and the consequent abolishment 
of Christianity — common people, I maintain, by whose 
money and votes this dogma is to be established, will not 
be debarred from asking the why and the wherefore, neither 
by Mr. Tyndall, nor by any other scientific pope. It is a 
little too late in the day for men who do not know their 
own mind from the Alps to Belfast, and who doubt whether 
God made them whenever they are dyspeptic, to stand up 
before the public demanding that we shut our eyes and 
open our mouths, and swallow every preposterous notion 
they think proper to proclaim as science, to the destruc- 
tion of our faith in the Grod who made us, of our respect 
for our brethren of mankind, and of our hope of heaven. 

II The Illogical Structure of tjie Tlieory. 

When men come before the world with a dogma freighted 
with such wide-reaching revolutions, they ought to be pre- 
pared to furnish the most irrefragable proofs of its truth, 
and of its obligation and authority. We should be able to 
establish it beyond all controversy as based on a series 
of facts which take their place historically in the line of 
the inductive sciences; about which all men of science 
are agreed, as all astronomers, for instance, are agreed 
about gravitation ; and we should be able to show that 
each of the alleged consequences flows inevitably and 
logically from these established facts. Ignorance, hy- 
pothesis, assumption of facts, sophisms, begging the ques- 
tion, and the like, are wholly impertinent in any such 
discussion. Were they even tolerable in the field of 



58 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



metaphysical discussion, they must, by the rules of the 
Positive Philosophy itself, banishing all but ascertained 
facts from the halls of science, be excluded from this 
discussion of an alleged general law of nature. But 
when we enter on the examination of the dogma of 
evolution, we find its parentage among ignoble supersti- 
tions ; its fundamental facts still lie in the darkness of ig- 
norance and assumption; and its reasoning is illogical and 
absurd. 

The most prominent feature which arrests our notice 
as we look closely at the theory of evolution, as presented 
by any of its prominent atheistical advocates is, its illogi- 
cal and incoherent structure. The writer contradicts him- 
self. The various parts of the theory do not hang to- 
gether. The alleged facts do not sustain the conclusions 
deduced from them. Mr. Darwin's books especially 
abound in the most intolerable assumptions of principles 
and facts, not only without proof, but in the face of unan- 
swered and unanswerable objections. And the theory is 
useless for the purpose of its proposal. All this is utterly 
at variance with the method of true science. None but a 
mind debauched by bigoted attachment to a preconceived 
theory could overlook these fatal defects in the system. 
Indeed both Darwin and Huxley admit that acceptance of 
the evidence must be preceded by belief in the principle 
of evolution. It is marvelous that any properly educated 
student of mental science should accept a theory so inco- 
herent, in which the rents are scarcely held together by 
the patches. We can only exhibit a few specimens of the 
multitude of these fatal inconsistencies and deficiencies. 

The theory is useless as an explanation of the arcana of 
Nature. Mr. Darwin is, by his own acknowledgment, a 
very ignorant man — ignorant of the very things necessary 
for him to know before he can construct a method of crea- 
tion, and unable to explain to us what he sets out to ex- 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 59 

plain. He confesses himself ignorant of the origin and 
laws of inheritance, by which his whole system hangs to- 
gether ; of the common ancestors from which he alleges all 
creatures are derived ; of the laws of correlation of parts, 
though these are indispensable to development ; of the 
reasons of the extinction of species, which is the great bus- 
iness, the very trade of his great agent, Natural Selection. 
He has no knowledge of the duration of past ages, though 
that duration is an essential element of his calculations. The 
spontaneous variations of plants and animals are the very 
mainspring of his machine; but he tells us he knows 
nothing of the laws governing them ; nor has he any in- 
formation about the creation of the primordial forms, nor 
about the date of beginning, or rate of progress.* All 
which are necessary to be known in order to the formation 
of a correct theory. Again and again, when confronted 
with facts which his theory can not explain, he takes 
refuge in confessions of ignorance. When he meets facts 
which flatly contradict his theory of the imperceptible 
beneficial acquirement of organs, or of properties by in- 
heritance — such as the sterility of hybrids, the instincts of 
neuter bees, the battery of the electric eel, the human eye, 
and the eye of the cuttle-fish, he owns that " it is impossi- 
ble to conceive by what steps these wondrous organs have 
been produced." When asked for the missing links be- 
tween existing species, he refers us to the undiscovere* 
fossiliferous strata below the Silurian. So Sir C. Lyell re 
fers us for a view of the apes, which developed the firs 
men, to the unexplored geological regions of Centre 
Africa ! And Eev. Baden Powell refers us, for the miss 
ing links of the chain of development, to " that enormous 
period of which we are, from the conditions, precluded 



•Origin of Species, 4, 10, 127, 9, 97, 100, 409, 410, 415, 423. 
Descent of Man, 192, 204, and II.— 15, 257. 



CO 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY? 



from knowing any thing whatever" And as to the Origin 
of Species, the very thing the title of his book proclaims, 
and how the original germs varied into the four or five 
primeval forms, and these into the next, he says : " Our ig- 
norance of the laws of variation is profound I " And that 
is science ! 

The Christian acknowledges his ignorance of the method 
of creation ; but he presents a sufficient cause fr the ex- 
istence of the facts. The evolutionist ridicules the Bible 
account of creation as incomprehensible, and then he gives 
us an account which he himself owns to be incomprehensi- 
ble, and which we, besides, perceive to be absurd. He 
proposes to explain to us the origin of species, and locates 
it in the geological strata of an unexplored continent, and 
in those remote ages of which by the conditions ice are 
precluded from knowing any tiling whatever! Objecting 
to the idea of the God of the Bible, as a self-existent, in- 
finite, intelligent, omnipotent, good Spirit, because of its 
unthinkability, Messrs. Spencer, Tyndall, and the rest as- 
sure us of the eternal self existence of an intelligent cloud 
of gas, endowed with all promises and potencies, of life and 
thought, as a simple and intelligible substitute ! Belief in 
God Almighty is only superstition, but faith in Mr. Tyn- 
dall's gas-god is science. Mr. Spencer honestly lands in 
the unknowable. Well, then, what science have we gained 
of the mysteries of our origin ? i 

Of the self-contradictions of evolutionists, we have an j 
instance in Huxley's treatment of the fundamental fact of,: 
his system — protoplasm. The grand question is: How . 
does the protoplasm become alive? In his famous lecture } 
on the subject, Physical Basis of Life, he argues through- 
out, that life is a property of protoplasm ; that protoplasm 
owes its properties to the nature and arrangement of its 
molecules ; that there is no more need to infer or allege a 
faculty called vitality, to account for the production of 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



61 



these various properties of the protoplasm from its chem- 
ical constituents, than to infer a power called aquosity, to 
account for the generation of water from oxygen and hy- 
drogen ; and that our thoughts are the expression of mole- 
cular changes in that matter of life which is the source of 
our other vital phenomena. Briefly, our minds are manu- 
factured by our bodies. But in his more recent work, the 
Classification of Animals, 1869, without any retraction of 
his previous error, or acknowledgment that he has changed 
his mind, he flatly contradicts his Physical Basis, accept- 
ing and indorsing " the well-founded doctrine that life is 
the cause and not the consequence of organization." 

A still more ridiculous incoherency of the same sort is 
displayed in the logical department of Huxley's Physical 
Basis of Life ; where, after trying to persuade us to put 
our feet on the ladder which leads in the reverse direction 
from Jacob's, and to descend with him into the slough of 
materialism, and affirming that " our thoughts are the ex- 
pression of molecular changes in that matter of life which 
is the source of our other vital phenomena ; " he goes on 
to say, that he does not believe in materialism. And he 
tries to vindicate himself by asserting that "we know 
nothing about the composition of any body whatever as it 
is." And this after deducing our thoughts from the mole- 
cular changes of the protoplasm ! A pretty story truly, 
and an impudent one ! Here is a man who will tell you 
all about how your body made your soul out of proto- 
plasm, and in the next page acknowledges that he knows 
nothing about the composition of either the body or soul 
as it is ! And yet this man will mock the believers in the 
Bible as "smothering their minds under a respectable 
feather bed of tradition," because they hesitate to shut 
their eyes, and swallow his contradictions. 

Mr. Wallace gives us a specimen of this logical incoher- 
ence affecting if possible still more deeply the foundations 



62 WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 

of philosophic faith * He heads his paragraph Matter is 
Force, and goes on to argue that matter is essentially force, 
and nothing but force; that matter, as popularly understood, 
does not exist. Then in a couple of pages he goes on to 
argue "that the whole universe is not merely dependent on, 
but actually is, the will of higher intelligences, or of one 
Supreme Intelligence " But the whole tenor of his book 
is thus demolished ; since evolution, if it means anything, 
means the interposition of natural law between the will of 
the one Supreme Intelligence and the universe. And on this 
theory Mr. Wallace's criticisms on Mr. Darwin and others 
are impious, beicg criticisms upon parts of the will of the 
one Supreme Intelligence. 

Similar instances of self-contradiction could be given, * 
did space permit, from almost every advocate of evolu- 
tion. 

Our space permits the exhibition of but a single instance 
of the inherent incoherency of the theory. There is 
nothing in which all the atheistic evolutionists are more 
emphatic than in the exclusion of design from the uni- 
verse. All their arguments and sneers are leveled against 
the idea, that the adaptations of Nature were designed or 
intended by an intelligent mind ; and the theory of ev- 
olution is welcomed chiefly because it enables them to give 
some account of the order of the world, without any ac- 
knowledgment of a providence guiding it to some end or 
purpose. But yet all these same evolutionists proclaim 
progress as the great law of Nature, and expend themselves 
with wonderful eloquence in tracing the progress of neb- 
ulae into worlds, and of worms into men. They glory in 
progress of the past, and prophesy progress in the future, 
apparently in the most childish unconsciousness, that the 
very idea of progress involves design, and that the fact of 



*Natural Selection, p. 365. Am. Ed. 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



03 



progress asserts providence. Nor is there any escape by 
alleging necessity of Nature, which is merely endowing the 
designer of progress with omnipotence as well as omnis- 
cience. 

1 The illogical character of the theory is still further 
1 manifested by the failure of its alleged facts to sustain the 
i consequences deduced from them. Suppose all the facts 
| alleged by the atheistic evolutionists were granted, how 
would they do away with the evidence of the being and 
government of God ? as they loudly allege they do. Let 
it be granted that all men grew up from monkeys, and the 
monkeys from worms, and all worms grew from invisible 
animalculse, and that the animalcule flashed into life by 
the chemical contact of the materials of the protoplasm, 
and that the protoplasm was a natural crop of the cooling 
globe, and that the cooling globe condensed itself out of 
fire -mist or nebulae or star dust, I demand to know how 
does all that enable me to get rid of the law of causation ? 
It is a necessary law of my nature to believe that every 
effect demands an adequate cause. It is equally a law of 
my nature to believe that every compound, or composite 
substance, is an effect, that the compound did not com- 
pound itself. 

Here is a great effect — a universe in solution, with all 
the chemical constituents of our globe and solar system 
floating in it, and all their laws of chemical affinity and 
proportion, and ail their electrical attractions and repul- 
sions, in full operation (else we would never get a universe '\ 
to thicken down out of it) ; and besides, all the potencies 
of vegetable and animal life, and all the great powers of 
the human mind, in a rather v.nporous condition, it is true, 
but still all there — Socrates, Seneca and Solomon, Moses, 
Solon and Blackstone Homer, Milton and Shakespeare, 
Demosthenes, Cicero and Daniel Webster, Watt, Stephen- 
son, Fulton and Morse; popes, puritans and evolutionists, 



64 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



universities and newspapers and congresses, the United 
States and the British Empire, and the rest of mankind — 
all boiled up into Mr. Tyndall's potencies, but all there in 
potency, just as truly as they ever were here in fact. 
Well ! here is a great effect just as imperatively demand- 
ing a great First Cause as the world afterward formed out 
of it. These substances did not make themselves then, 
any more than the resulting persons or paving stones make 
themselves now, and they did not endow themselves with 
these potencies, nOr calculate and establish these laws of 
chemical combination in exact proportion, nor determine 
scientifically the laws of gravitation and electricity and 
light and heat, before they came into being ; which must 
have all been established before a single particle of the 
star dust could begin to cool, or to approach another. The 
very first idea of matter or of force we can form demands 
law, and law is merely another name for the divine order 
of Nature. Whatever foundation for Natural Religion, 
for faith in God as the Creator and Governor of the world, 
is afforded by the existing order of the world, it is in no 
degree logically weakened (though it may be practically) 
by viewing that order as reached by a process of evolution, 
since that process also must have been designed, planned, 
adapted to its purpose, and divinely superintended. 

Accordingly, we find that many philosophers, and some 
divines, acknowledge a process of the evolution of Cod's 
great idea, and adore him for the growth alike of forests 
and firmaments, regarding evolution, thus conditioned, as 
profoundly religious. St. Augustine, and St. Thomas 
Aquinas, of old, and many modern speculators, have as- 
sented to the theory of evolution as perfectly consistent 
with belief in Cod, as its Author. It is utterly illogical to 
allege that evolution has banished final causes. Crant it 
all its facts, and these facts proclaim Cod. 

It is evident, however, that evolutionists are not confi- 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



65 



dent of the ability of the facts which they are able to 
allege to sustain their theory, since they are perpetually 
postulating assumptions necessary to their argument, but 
which are utterly unproved, and incapable of proof. Mr. 
Darwin is the most notorious offender against inductive 
science in this respect. I have now before me a list of 
eighty-six assumptions of this sort in the Origin of Species 
alone. Those in his other works are too numerous to 
mention, He continually mistakes his own assertions, or 
even his own mere conjectures, for proof, and refers back 
to them, and builds further assumptions upon them accord- 
ingly ; and he assumes facts unproven and incapable of 
proof ; and principles which he must know are denied by 
his opponents. We can only take a few instances at 
random. 

He assumes that all dogs are developed from wolves 
(Descent of Man, page 48) ; that the instincts of 
animals are developed (page 38) ; that language was de- 
veloped (page 53) ; that there is a wider interval between 
the lamprey and the ape than between the ape and the 
man, thus begging the question of man's brutality (page 
34); that the savage is the original state of man (page 
63) ; that parental instincts are the result of Natural Se- 
lection, after owning utter ignorance of their origin (page 
77) ; that the ideas of glory and infamy are the workings 
of sympathy (page, 82) ; the heredity of moral tastes 
(page 98) ; that the standard of morality has been rising 
since the giving of the ten commandments (page 99) ; that 
our ancestors were quadrupeds (page 11G); that there 
have been thousands of generations (page 125) ; that 
breeds have the character of species (Origin of Species, 
page 411); that rudimentary organs are inherited abor- 
tions (page 424) ; that there are four or five original pro- 
genitors, and distant evidence of only one (page 425); 
he assumes descent to prove his geology (page 428) ; and 
5 



66 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



perpetual progress toward perfection (pages 59, 140, 176, 
428), in the face of his own facts of retrogression. 

Then look at the outrageous character of the assumption 
that beneficial variations may be added up indefinitely, 
that is, to infinity. Because a gymnast can leap over two 
horses, can his son leap over three? and his son over four? 
and his son over five ? and can we in time breed a man 
who will leap to the moon? And yet the whole theory is 
based upon forgetfulness of the maxim, that there is a 
limit to all things, and of the fact, that in creatures of 
flesh and blood this limit is very soon reached. 

Look again at the utterly erroneous assumption that 
the tendency of the struggle for life is to improve the 
combatants ; an assumption contradicted by the whole his- 
tory of famine, war, pauperism, and disease, among brutes 
and men. Were the survivors of the Irish famine of 
1847, or those of the Persian, or Bengali famines improved 
by their struggle for life ? It is true the fittest survived ; 
but that was all ; they were miserably emaciated and de- 
moralized. Were the peasantry of Europe improved by 
the wars of the French Revolution? On the contrary, 
though the fittest survived, France was obliged to lower 
the recruiting standard three inches. In all cases the strug- 
gle for life injures all concerned. 

And yet upon these two fundamental assumptions the 
theory is built ; of which that of the indefinite accumula- 
tion of small profitable variations is outrageously impossi- 
ble and absurd ; and the other, of the improvement of 
breeds by starvation and hardships, is contrary to all ob- 
servation and experience ! Take away these two assump- 
tions, and the whole theory of the gradual improvement of 
plants and animals by such agency vanishes. There is no 
such power of indefinite improvement by Natural Selec- 
tion, as Mr. Darwin asserts. The utmost it can do is to 
keep breeds up to the natural standard, or near to it, by 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



67 



destroying the weakest ; but at the same time it weakens 
the strongest also. Were there no other objection, this 
one would be fatal, that Mr. Darwin assigns an elevating 
power to a depressing agency, and asserts war, famine, 
hardship, and disease as his holy angels perfecting prog- 
ress. 

Mr. Darwin presents the most preposterous assumptions 
with such coolness and apparent unconsciousness of their 
utter improbability to his readers, and with such an entire 
ignoring of the necessity of any further attestation than 
his own ipse dixit, as to warrant serious suspicions of his 
sanity. Take, for instance, his bear and whale story. 
Hearne reports having seen in the Arctic regions a bear 
swimming in the water for hours, with his mouth wide open, 
catching flies ; and Mr. Darwin says if the supply of flies 
were constant (where the winter lasts eight months of the 
year 40° below zero) he can see no difficulty in the produc- 
tion at length of an animal as monstrous as a whale! M. 
Comte's disciples never suspected their master's sanity till 
he invented a religion for them. 

2. This theory, it should be remembered, is merely a the- 
ory, a mere notion, a hypothesis. It is not even alleged that 
it is based upon facts actually discovered. The alleged 
facts of the cooling of the nebulas, the chemical origin of 
life upon our globe, and the development of the original 
Ascidian into the fish, and that into the monkey, and of 
the monkey into the man, never were witnessed by any- 
body nor could they be witnessed. La Place was honest 
enough to call his part of the theory, The Nebular Hypo- 
thesis. He had no idea of claiming for it the rank of a 
fact of science upon which he, or anybody else, might 
build a system. Nor are the modern assertors of evolution 
able to establish a single instance of the chemical origin 
of life at the present day; though thousands of experi- 
ments have been made attempting that exploit, by English, 



68 WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 

French, and German chemists during the last forty years. 
Nor has a single case of the transmutation of species ever 
been observed in wild animals or plants j nor has any 
change of species been produced in tame ones by domesti- 
cation or culture. No naturalist has seen a community of 
apes in the process of improvement toward manhood ; nor 
has any philologist described the first attempts of the mon- 
keys toward the articulation of language, or the manufac- 
ture of clothing, unless we except Mr. Lemuel Gulliver's 
interesting account of the Yahoos. It must be acknowl- 
edged that the animals described by that accurate observer, 
and graphic describer, approach more nearly to those re- 
quired by Mr. Darwin's theory than any ever seen before, 
or since. Hence it is greatly to be desired that some scien- 
tific evolutionists should thoroughly explore those regions, 
investigate the manners and customs of the Yahoos with 
the enthusiasm of a true Darwinian, and minutely describe 
those interesting features which would enable us to decide 
whether they are monkeys progressing to manhood, or men 
brutalizing into apehood; but which Mr Gulliver's lack of 
scientific enthusiasm for evolution prevented him from 
closely examining. But until the scientific standing ot 
Mr. Gulliver's Yahoos is determined, the theory of evolu- 
tion must be assigned to the mountains of speculations, big 
with expectation, but which yet await the birth of their 
first fact. 

Mr. Darwin indeed alleges the results of domestication 
upon animals and plants, as producing permanent varieties 
as different in appearance as many which are ranked by 
naturalists as different species , and he alleges that Natural 
Selection carries on a similar process of improvement 
among wild animals and plants. 

But the facts of domestication are most emphatic in re- 
fusing to acknowledge any change of species of the most 
carefully bred animals. The efforts of breeders have been 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



09 



exerted for thousands of years upon the dog, the ox, the 
goat, the sheep, and the ass, the horse, and the camel, 
among animals; and upon the goose, the duck, and the 
pigeon, and for a shorter time, but still for two thousand 
years, upon the common barn-door poultry. Farmers in 
all lands, since the deluge, have used their best exertions 
to improve the cereals, the fruit trees, the vines, and root 
crops, and vegetables, and the result has been some valu- 
able modifications of size, shape, flavor, and fertility ; but 
in no case whatever has any change of species been ef- 
fected. All the efforts of breeders have not succeeded in 
making the horse specifically different from the noble ani- 
mal described in the Book of Job four thousand years 
ago. The sheep has not become a goat, nor the goat a 
sheep, by all the pains of all the shepherds since the days 
of Abel. The ass displays not the least tendency to be- 
come a horse, nor the goat to become a cow. Mr. Darwin 
makes great capital out of pigeons, enumerating all the 
varieties owned by fanciers, and showing how the Indian 
emperors bred them a thousand years before Christ. But 
it is strange that he does not see that this makes against 
his theory ; since in all that time this most variable of 
birds has never been transmuted into any other species. 
The pigeon has never been changed into a crow, or a mag- 
pie, or a woodpecker, or a chicken ; has never, in fact, be- 
come anything else than a pigeon. Dogs are also some- 
what variable in their varieties, and Mr. Darwin relies 
greatly upon supposed variations from some one assumed 
ancestral pair of dogs, into the greyhound, mastiff, ter- 
rier, and lapdog. But granting all these unproven varia- 
tions, no instance is alleged of a dog ever becoming a cat 
or a lion by any care or culture. 

It will not do to allege, that, for anything we know to 
the contrary, our present breeds of domestic animals and 



70 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



plants may be so different from those called by the same 
names in ancient times as to be really different species. 

We do know many things to the contrary. In the 
tombs of the Egyptians, and the sculptures of the Assyrians, 
we have pictures of the various plants, birds, and animals, 
from three to four thousand years old, as well as of man, 
the most domestic animal of the whole. These paintings 
and sculptures assure us that in all those millenniums do- 
mestication has not produced the slightest change in the 
races of animals, plants, or men. The Ethiopian has not 
changed his skin, nor the leopard his spots. The negro 
was then the same black-skinned, woolly-headed, flat- 
nosed, thick-lipped, long-heeled person he is to day, as 
pompous, good-humored, and fond of finery. The Assyr- 
ian statues are good, recognizable likenesses of eminent 
living Jewish merchants, in London and New Orleans. 
The old Pharaohs of the monuments can be matched for 
face and figure any day in the bazars of Cairo. The grey- 
hound of the tombs is the same variety now used for cours- 
ing hares in the desert. The camel, the ass, and the 
Arab, and Assyrian breeds of horses, have not been at all 
improved in forty centuries. Even Mr. Darwin's favorite 
pigeons would seem to have ceased to vary; for the carrier- 
pigeons let loose by Sesostris, to carry the news of his 
coronation to all the cities of Egypt, do not differ a feather 
from the modern Egyptian carrier-pigeons. The various 
wild animals, and many of the plants, are represented on 
these monuments in great variety. Among these I have 
noted the lotus, the papyrus, the leek, the palm, wheat, 
barley, and millet; the crocodile, the frog, the crane, 
the flamingo, the ibis, the goose, the owl, the ostrich, the 
peacock; and of beasts the now famous ancestral ape, 
Ptolemy's tame lion, the leopard, the gazelle, the hippo- 
potamus, the giraffe, and the wild boar, and many others. 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



71 



But there is not the least perceptible change in the corre- 
sponding species now inhabiting Egypt and the desert. 

We can go further than the mere external appearance ; 
for we can actually dissect specimens of the various ani- 
mals, and thus satisfy ourselves whether any physiological 
change, amounting to a transmutation of species, has oc- 
curred, or was in progsess; and the investigation has been 
conducted by no less a physiologist and zoologist than Cu- 
vier, whose authority in such matters no naturalist will dis- 
pute. And this is what he says: "It might seem as if the 
ancient Egyptians had been inspired by nature, for the 
purpose of transmitting to after ages a monument of her 
natural history. That strange and whimsical people, by 
embalming with so much care the brutes which were the 
objects of their stupid adoration, have left us in their 
sacred grottoes cabinets of zoology almost complete. 
Climate has conspired with art to preserve the bodies from 
corruption, and we can now assure ourselves with our own 
eyes what was the state of a good number of species three 
thousand years ago. * * * I have endeavored to col- 
lect all the ancient documents respecting the forms of ani- 
mals, and there are none equal to those furnished by the 
Egyptians, both in regard to their antiquity and abund- 
ance. I have examined with the greatest care the en- 
graved figures of quadrupeds and birds upon the obelisks 
brought from Egypt to ancient Home; and all these fig- 
ures, one with another, have a perfect resemblance to their 
intended objects, such as they still are in our days. My 
learned friend, Geoffrey St. Hilaire, convinced me of the 
importance of this research, and carefully collected in the 
tombs and temples of Upper and Lower Egypt as many 
mummies of aoimals as he could procure. He has brought 
home the mummies of cats, ibises, birds of prey, dogs, 
crocodiles, and the head of a bull. After the most atten- 
tive and detailed examination, not the smallest difference 



72 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



is to be perceived between tbese animals and those of the 
same species which we now see, any more than between 
human mummies and skeletons of men of the present day."* 

There is then not the first fact, or appearance of a fact, 
to be adduced in proof of the change of species either by 
domestication, or Natural Selection, or any other process 
known to man. That any such evolution of any animal, 
or plant, into one of another species ever occurred, is a 
mere empty notion, in support of which no facts can be 
adduced. All the animals and plants of which we know 
anything have remained unchanged since the beginning of 
man's observation of them. The theory endeavors to ac- 
count for a change which never happened. It is a mere 
empty dream, unworthy of a serious consideration by any 
mind imbued with the first principle of inductive science — 
namely, that all science is the orderly knowledge of facts; 
and whose first rule is, first ascertain your facts. 

But it is urged, that though such a change has not oc- 
curred during the brief period of human history, it may 
have been practicable in the lengthened periods revealed 
by geology, and while the forces of nature were more vig- 
orous during the youth of our planet. This, in fact, is 
the grand resource of the modern evolutionists — the al- 
most infinite periods and possibilities of geology. 

We refuse, however, to follow Mr. Powell into those un- 
explored realms of the infinite past and discuss the possi- 
bilities of ages, of which " by the conditions we can not 
know anything whatever." We will go as far as the geo- 
logical strata furnish us with any facts, any evidences of 
life, any traces of plants or animals of which correspond- 
ing species still exist, and will unhesitatingly affirm, on the 
authority of the most eminent geologists, that such geo- 
logical representatives of existing species furnish no evi- 



*Theory of the Earth, 123. 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



73 



dencc whatever of evolution into higher forms. On the 
contrary, we shall show that many species have existed 
without the slightest change for many thousands, aye, and 
millions of years, sufficiently long to establish the fact of 
the permanence of species during the geologic ages known 
to man. 

Geologists are generally agreed that the first Florida 
Coral Reef is at least 30,000 years old ; but Agassiz asserts, 
uncontradicted, that the insect which built it has not altered 
in the least in that period, and he says regarding it: u These 
facts furnish evidence, as direct as we can obtain in any 
branch of physical inquiry, that some at least of the species 
of animals now existing have been in existence 30,000 
years, and have not undergone the slightest change in that 
period." But we can go still further back, and demonstrate 
the permanence of vegetable structure. Hugh Miller says : 
" The oak, the birch, the hazel, the Scotch fir, all lived, I 
repeat, in what is now Britain, ere the last great depression 
of the land. The gigantic northern elephant and rhinoc- 
eros, extinct for untold ages, forced their way through 
the tangled branches; and the British tiger and hyena 
harbored in their thickets. Cuvier framed an argument for 
the fixity of species on the fact that the birds and beasts 
of the catacombs were identical in every respect with the 
animals of the same kind that live now. But what, it has 
been asked, is a brief period of 3,000 years, when com- 
pared with the geologic ages ? Or how could any such ar- 
gument be founded on a basis so little extended? It is, 
however to no such narrow basis that we can refer in the 
case of these woods. All human history is comprised in 
the nearer corner of the immense period they measure out; 
and yet from their first appearance in creation till now, 
they have not altered a single fiber. And such on this 
point is the invariable testimony of Paleontologic science, 
testimony so invariable that no great Paleontologist was 



74 WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 

ever yet an asserter of the Development Hypothesis."* 
To the same purpose let us hear Huxley's testimony, since 
no one will suspect him of undue respect for Moses: "Ob- 
viously if the earliest fossiliferous rocks now known are 
coeval with the commencement of life, and if their con- 
tents give us any just conception of the earliest fauna and 
flora, the insignificant amount of modification which can 
be demonstrated to have taken place in any one group 01 
animals and plants, is quite incompatible with the hypo- 
thesis that all living forms are the results of a process of 
necessary progressive development entirely comprised 
within the time represented by the fossiliferous rocks. "f 

We are fully warranted, then, in alleging, that no such 
transmutation of species is known to science, as an existing 
fact, or as having ever occurred. . 

As to the supposition on which the evolutionists fall 
back, that such a miracle might-have happened thousands 
of millions of years before the formation of the lowest 
rocks known to us, we might well decline the discussion of 
may-be's as facts of science. 

But there is a positive denial of unimaginable periods 
of time for Mr. Darwin's evolution to try its blundering 
experiments. We are empowered to say positively, No ! 
There is no such length of time for you, Mr. Darwin, 
on this little globe at least. This rotating world had 
a beginning; so had our moon; and our sun, too, began 
to burn one day. And there are data of the revolu- 
tion of these bodies, and of the secular cooling of the 
earth, and of the gradual combustion of the sun, and of 
the retardation of the earth's motions, from which SirWm. 
Thompson (in his Treatise on Geological Time) calculates, 
that our earth has not been in a fit state for plants and ani- 
mals for more than a hundred millions of years; and he 

^Testimony of the Bocks, 77. 

tAddress at Annual Meeting of the Geological Society, 1862. 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



75 



demonstrates the absurdity of the demand for unlimited . 
time, as contradictory to the facts of physical astronomy. 
Hence we deny the possibility of evolution in the infinite 
ages of the past There never were any such ages on this 
world of ours. 

4. Failing to find facts, evolutionists fall back upon 
analogies, and support their hypothesis by the suppose^ 
analogy of the growth of the embryos of all plants and ani- 
mals from germs alleged to be originally perfectly similar — 
simple protoplasm cells, which by subsequent evolution, 
differentiate themselves as widely as the moss from the 
man. 

The subject is too obscure for popular discussion. I can 
only announce the results of the latest and most authorita- 
tive researches.* 

1. Analogy is a very unsafe guide here, because the dif- 
ferences between the limited life of the individual, and the 
alleged unlimited life of the race, are precisely those of 
which we have no analogy. 

2. It is not true that "the original substratum or ma- 
terial is in every instance alike," nor that the "primordial 
cell is in every instance the same," whether of the "lichen 
or the man; "f nor as others allege, " that chemical reagents 
detect no differences between them." Chemical reagents 
are very clumsy instruments for the analysis of living be- 
ings, and their properties and- powers; which are the antag- 
onists of chemical reactions. Nevertheless, heat is a well- 
known chemical agent, and the application of heat to a 
fertilized, and to an unfertilized, germ develops a whole 
world of difference between them. The one becomes a 
chicken, the other an addled egg. Moreover, the applica- 
tion of different degrees of heat to different germs pro- 

*Agassiz's Methods of Study. 
fDraper's Human Physiology, 506. 



76 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



duces the most various reactions. The germs of trout are 
speedily killed by the moderate temperature of 65° Fahren- 
heit, while the germs of most animalculae and plants de- 
velop rapidly at that temperature. Such instances might 
be multiplied, but these are sufficient to contradict the 
rash assertion of sameness, because a hasty observer did 
not take pains to discover differences. 

3. There are four distinct plans of structure in the ani- 
mal kingdom, and at least three, perhaps more, in the veg- 
etable kingdom; and every germ, from the first instant 
when its evolution can be seen at all, is seen to develop 
only according to its own proper method. There is no 
more confusion of germs, or embryos, than of plants or an- 
imals. 

4. No instance has ever been known of a germ produc- 
ing an animal, or plant, of another species, by any process 
of stopping short of ripening, or undue prolongation of 
it. Every seed breeds true to its kind, or not at all, or 
produces a deformity. Embryology utterly refuses the 
notion of the transmutation of species. 

Mr. Darwin's various references to rudimentary organs, 
like the bones of a hand in the flipper of the whale, or the 
teats of male animals, and the like, can hardly be called 
arguments. He tries to account for them and fails; ac- 
knowledging ignorance of the laws of heredity. Some of 
them he will have to be young organs in process of evo- 
lution, others organs aborted for want of exercise. In 
this category he ought to place the tail which he ought to 
have inherited from his ancestors, as he is greatly exercised 
to know what became of it. But it is evident that his at- 
tempts to build arguments on such things, and to account 
for occasional variations by atarism, are in contradiction 
to his principles Most of the known instances of the 
origination of permanent varieties were not the result of 
infinitesimal improvements, but were sudden and com- 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



77 



plete at once The Japan peacocks, the short-legged 
sheep, the porcupine man and his family, and the six-fin- 
gered men, were not at all the results of a slow process of 
evolution ; on the contrary, they were born so, complete at 
once, in utter contradiction of the theory. 

5. The only other line of argument, which has any show 
of probability, is that based upon the gradations of the 
various orders of plants and animals. Not but that there 
* are many other arguments adduced, but they are of too 
technical a character to be intelligible to any but zoologists, 
and of too little weight to demand consideration after the 
leading arguments are overturned. But this argument 
from gradation, though logically unsound, is plausibly 
specious, and therefore demands notice. 

By far the ablest exhibition of this argument is that 
made by Lamarck, and we give it as he presents it: "The 
greater the abundance of natural objects assembled to- 
gether, the more do we discover proofs that everything 
passes by insensible shades into something else ; that even 
the more remarkable differences are evanescent, and that 
nature has for the most part left us nothing at our disposal 
for establishing distinctions, save trifling, and in some re- 
spects puerile particularities. "We find that many genera 
among plants and animals are of such an extent, in conse- 
quence of the number of species referred to them, that the 
study and determination of these last have become almost 
impracticable. When the species are arranged in a series, 
and placed near to each othes, with a due regard to their 
natural aflinities, they each differ in so minute a degree 
from those next adjoining, that they almost melt into each 
other, and are in a manner confounded together. If we 
see isolated species, we may presume the absence of some 
more closely connected, and which have not yet been dis- 
covered. Already there are genera, and even entire or- 
ders, nay, whole classes which present this state of things." 



78 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



He then goes on to present, "as a guide to conjecture," 
what his successors now assert as a fact: "In the first 
place, if we examine the whole series of known animals, 
from one extremity to the other, when they are arranged 
in the order of their natural relations, we find that we may 
pass progressively, or at least with very few interruptions, 
from beings of more simple to those of more compound 
structure; and in proportion as the complexity of their 
organization increases, the number and dignity of their 
faculties increase also. Among plants a similar approx- 
imation to a graduated scale of being is apparent. Sec- 
ondly, it appears, from geological observations, that plants 
and animals of more simple organization existed on the 
globe before the appearance of those of more compound 
structure, and the latter were successively formed at more 
modern periods, each new race being more fully developed 
than the most perfect of the preceding one."* 

From this gradation of nature, thus stated, the evolu- 
tionists go on to infer genealogy, the birth descent of the 
larger from the smaller, and of the more complex from the 
simpler forms, as the only scientific explanation. But it 
is by no means the only scientific explanation of the order 
of nature. The best naturalists, from Moses to Agassiz, 
have regarded the order of nature as the development of 
the divine idea, have prosecuted their researches on that 
view, and have regarded that as a sufficient and scientific 
explanation of the gradation of plants and animals, as they 
actually exist. 

The idea of birth descent can not be logically connected 
with that of gradation; especially with a gradation upward. 
Were the order of nature such as Lamarck describes, how 
could any man logically infer the birth descent of each of 
its classes from the next below ? Here is an ironmonger's 
sample card of wood screws, beginning with those one- 

*LyeU's Principles of Geology, Book III., Chapter 33. 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY? 



73 



quarter of an inch long, and proceeding by gradations of 
one-sixteenth of an inch to those of four inches. Does 
the gradation show that the little ones begot the big ones? 
It may be said the wood screws do not beget progeny. 
Well, here is a hill containing twenty-three potatoes, 
weighing from half an ounce to half a pound, and quite 
regularly graded. Did the small potatoes beget the big 
ones? The inference of birth descent from gradation is 
utterly illogical, and of a piece with the incoherency which 
we have seen in the other parts of the theory. It never 
could be inferred from the facts stated, even did nature 
correspond to Lamarck's description. 

But nature does not correspond to Lamarck's descrip- 
tion. That description corresponded moderately, perhaps, 
to the science of his day, which was based chiefly upon 
external resemblances; but no scientific naturalist of the 
present day would accept it as a correct statement of the 
facts revealed by modern science. 

In the first place there is no such imperceptible blend- 
ing and shading off of species as the description would 
imply, obliterating all distinctions of species, and rendering 
it impossible even for a naturalist to distinguish one species 
from another. Since the time of Lamarck, structure and 
physiology have been more studied than mere external ap- 
pearances ; so that from a tooth or bone Cuvier or Agassiz 
could reconstruct an animal, and indicate its internal or- 
ganization, as well as its form and habits. But even in 
Lamarck's days, and even to the most uneducated, there 
was no such imperceptible shading and blending as the 
theory requires. It is well to look here at its requirements, 
for they are not fully presented by its friends. Mr. Dar- 
win gives us a diagram exhibiting the variation of an orig- 
inal species into a score or so of varieties, ending in distinct 
species. But this is very far, indeed, below the necessities 
of the case. The horse hair worm lays 8,000,000 of eggsj 



80 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



and the primeval germ, whatever it was, could hardly he 
less fertile, since fertility increases with simplicity of struc- 
ture. But, taking 8,000,000 to begin with, here were as 
many varieties; since no two of them, or of any creature, 
could be exactly alike. The next generation would give 
8,000,000 times as many varieties, and so on till Natural 
Selection began to thin off the feeble. But here we have, 
instead of a few well-marked varieties, an infinite multitude 
of imperceptible variations, rendering classification impos- 
sible. And as all these were only varieties of the same 
breed, they would breed together, and thus still more con- 
fuse the complexity, and render distinction of species im- 
possible. For, in spite of all Mr. Darwin has to say about 
the extinction of the weaker varieties, the fact is, they are 
not at all extinguished, but keep their ground as well as 
the higher classes, or perhaps better. And if a snail, or a 
worm, can contrive to live now in an unimproved condition, 
why should its improving cousin die off? Did its improve- 
ment kill it? And so of improving mollusks, and well- 
doing radiates, and aspiring rabbits, and all the rest. The 
world ought to be so full of them that no man could sort 
them off into species, or tell which was fish, which was 
flesh, and which red herring; and no pork packer could 
distinguish hog from dog. 

But instead of any such horrible confusion of a world 
full of mongrels, we discover a clear and well defined dis- 
tinction of species, known even to the poor animals them- 
selves, and by their instincts made known to all mankind. 
The Creator, who created all creatures after their kind, 
implanted in them an instinct of breeding only with their 
own species; and placed a bar in the way of man's vain 
attempts to work confusion of species, by rendering the 
hybrid offspring of different species sterile, or only capable 
of breeding back to the pure blood. Innumerable attempts 
have been made by fraud and force to procure cross breeds 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



81 



of different species of plants and animals, but always with 
the same result — the extinction of the progeny of the hy- 
brid, unless bred back to nature. While a mingling of 
various breeds of the same species —horses, sheep, or cat- 
tle — generally increases fertility, the attempt to mingle 
different species, as the horse and the ass, though so sim- 
ilar, always produces sterile offspring. It is impossible to 
conceive any form in which the Creator could more em- 
phatically protest against the attempt to confuse the dis- 
tinctions of species He established. 

God has fixed a barrier against the mixture or confusion 
of species by cross breeding, by ordaining the sterility of 
hybrids. Mr. Darwin labors in vain to explain away this 
great fact. It can not be explained into conformity with 
the evolution theory; for in that theory all species are 
only breeds or varieties of one species, and ought to in- 
crease their fertility by cross breeding. With all scientific 
naturalists, as with all people of common sense, this proves 
that species have a distinct existence in nature, and that 
the Creator has ordained the continuance of their distinct 
existence; which is the denial of evolution. 

When Mr. Darwin retreats into the geologic ages, and 
confessing that his principle has ceased to be opera- 
tive now in our world, and refers us to them for such 
evolution of one species from another, he abandons the 
fundamental principle of his school — the uniformity of 
nature — and falls back on Christian ground, the necessity 
for supernatural origins. He virtually admits the death 
or superannuation of Natural Selection, since it has re- 
tired from the business of species-making. 

But when we go back to those old geologic ages, we find 
that species were then not only as distinct as now, but that 
the distinctions were even bolder and more visible. Many 
of them have ceased to exist, but they have left their 

h. 6 



S2 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



shells, their petrified casts, and their bones, by which we 
can see that they stood apart in well-defined groups, with- 
out any such blending and confusion as the evolution theory 
asserts. Over three thousand species are already classified. 
Between every two of them there ought to be, on Mr. 
Darwin's showing, a hundred intermediate variations at the 
least; and between some of the more widely separated forms 
there ought to be thousands of intermediate varieties; as 
for instance between the bear and the whale ; and a still 
greater number between the mollusk with its external 
shell, and the vertebrate with its internal skeleton. And 
we ought to find these intermediate forms closely connected 
with their parents and their children. For intermediate 
forms iu another continent could not be the connecting 
links between the mollusks and vertebrates of a distant 
country, say of England. In the same strata in which we 
find the two ends of the chain, and lying between the two 
ends of the chain, we ought to find the connecting links. 
And we ought to find a hundred connecting links for 
every specimen of distinct species, since Mr. Darwin alleges 
that they must have lived and died somewhere; and we have 
seen they must have lived and died right there where they 
were born, and where they begot their progeny. The geo- 
logical strata ought to be full of connecting links. 

But when we come to look for them they are not there. 
Geology knows nothing about them. It has plenty of dis- 
tinct, well-defined species — trilobites, and ammonites, and 
echinoderms, palms, ferns, firs, and mosses, all sorts of 
quadrupeds from a mou^e to a mastodon, and all just as 
clean-cut and well-defined as the species of existing ani- 
mals. Mr. Darwin can not find his connecting links be- 
tween the species which ought to have been a hundred 
times more plentiful than the species they connected. 
These connecting links are missing links. He ought to 
be able to overwhelm his opponents, and bury them under 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 83 

mountains of the bones of intermediate species. But all 
his friends can do is to suggest about half a dozen, while 
he needs three hundred thousand. He can not pay half a 
cent on the dollar. In his grief he turns round and abuses 
the defectiveness of the geological record, which he says 
he could never have suspected of being so defective but for 
this failure to meet his drafts. But he need not blame the 
geological record for not preserving bones of animals which 
never lived. Geology says there never was any such con- 
fusion of species as evolution asserts. 

But not only does the general structure of the web of 
nature present a clearly striped pattern, instead of the 
mottled gray of the theory — neither the beginning, nor 
the middle, nor the end is like what the evolution theory 
would produce. 

The gradation does not begin, as the theory asserts and 
demands, with the monads. On the contrary, we find that 
there are four kingdoms of animal life — in an ascending 
scale — the radiate, or starfish; the mollusk, or oyster; the 
articulate, or insect; and the vertebrate, or animals with 
backbones. Now the evolution ought to have begun at the 
bottom, with the radiate, the coral, and the starfish; it 
should have gone upward, the coral developing into the 
oyster, and the oyster into the lobster, and the lobster into 
the salmon, and so on. But instead of that we discover, 
away down in the Silurian strata, at the very beginning of 
life, all the four kingdoms — the radiates, the mollusks, the 
articulates, and the fish ! Evidently, then, there was no 
such beginning of the world as evolutionists suppose. 

Then as we work upward along the line of march, and 
of the development of the divine idea, we observe that 
when new species were introduced, they did not work up 
slowly from small and weak beginnings ; beginning with 
dwarfs and growing up to giants ; but, on the contrary, the 
giants head the column. The geological books are full of 



84 WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 

• 

them — sharks forty feet long, frogs as big as oxen, ichthyo- 
saurus and plesiosaurus of fabulous proportions — were not 
their skeletons preserved— pterodactyles, or bats, as big as 
a dog, the mastodon giganteus, beside which an ordinary 
modern elephant is like a Shetland pony beside a dray 
horse, ferns as big as oak trees, and mosses eighteen inches 
in diameter, shell fish of the nautilus order the size of din- 
ner plates, and crusteceans, cousins to the lobster, three 
feet long. And all this at the very first start in life of 
these respective families, and in overwhelming multitudes. 
That was no age of small beginnings, and small progressive 
improvements. On the contrary, these old families, like 
some other old families, seem to have rather lost rank, and 
bulk, and influence ; at least their modern representatives 
cut no such figure in the world as their predecessors. 

As we proceed along the line we meet gaps which slay 
the theory of genealogical descent altogether. A gap is 
fatal to it. If a family dies out, that is the end of it. You 
can not resuscitate it after a few centuries, and go on with 
that breed ; much less can you pick up a breed quite dif- 
ferent, and attach it to your old genealogy. But in the line 
of evolution we meet these fatal gaps; and no evolutionist 
has bridged them, because they can not possibly be bridged. 

The first great gap is the abyss between death and life. 
No human power can cross it. How could the chemical 
actions of dead matter infuse vitality into the first germ, 
or bud of a plant? For chemical actions are the antago- 
nists of life, and constantly laboring to destroy the living 
organism, and finally they succeed. There is no process of 
evolution known to man which can carry evolution across 
this abyss. But till evolution crosses this gulf it can not 
even begin to operate. This first abyss is its grave. 

But, supposing life begun in the plant first, as the theory 
requires, there is another gap between the life of the plant 
and that of the animal j for all animal life is sustained by an- 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



85 



other sort of food than that which feeds the vegetable. The 
vegetable feeds solely on chemical, unorganized matters; the 
animal solely on matter organized, on some plant, or on some 
other animal which feeds on plants. No animal can live 
on the food of plants. Here then is another gap which 
can not be bridged over, nor crossed; for the plant in 
process of conversion into an animal is in process of star- 
vation, and when the process is about to be completed, it 
will end like the miser's horse, whose master diminished 
his oats Darwinianly, a single grain a day, until he had 
brought him to live on just one grain per day, when, alas! 
the victim of the experiment died. And so ends evolution 
experiment No. 2. 

Then we come on a multitude of gaps, breaks in the uni- 
formity of nature, called for by the evolutionists, between 
the species which will not breed together. There ought 
to be no such species on the theory; or, if there are, there 
ought to be a multitude of intervening varieties toning 
down the interval ; for instance, between the horse and 
the cow, and between the sheep and the hog. All the in- 
genuity of all the evolutionists has been tasked in vain to 
produce any instance of the confusion of two such species, 
or of the production of a new true species by the intermix- 
ture of blood. But they might just as well try to convert 
iron into gold, or sulphur into carbon. In fact, evolution 
is the modern physiological form of the old chemical su- 
perstition, alchemy, substituting for the transmutation of 
metals the problem of the transmutation of animals. 

It were endless to attempt to exhibit the impossibilities 
of crossing the gaps between the water-breathing fish and 
the air-breathing animal ; between the flying-bird and the 
quadruped; between instinct and education; between brute 
selfishness and maternal affection; between the habits of 
the solitary and those of the gregarious, and those of the 
colonial insects and animals. No one of these is accounted 



SG 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



for satisfactorily by the theory of evolution. But space 
forbids the attempt. 

We only cite one other gulf which the theory can not 
cross : the gulf between the brute and the man. We should 
rather say the three gulfs; for between man's body and 
that of the brute there is a gap which Natural Selection 
can not cross ; another between man's intellectual powers 
and those of brutes ; and the third, and widest of all, be- 
tween his conscience and their brutal appetites. 

The gulf between man's body and that of any brute is 
marked along the whole line, from the solid basis of the 
feet, enabling him to stand erect, look upward and behold 
the stars; along the line of the stiff backbone, maintaining 
the dignified posture ; to the hands, on which treatises 
have been written, displaying their wonderful superiority 
over those of all other creatures, and enabling man to do 
what no other animal has done, to fill the world with his 
handiworks, and alter the very face of nature with his ax, 
and spade, and steam engine. His tongue and organs of 
articulate speech alone, were there no other characteristic, 
proclaim him different from all other animals ; none of 
those resembling him in outward form making the slightest 
attempts toward articulate language or being able to do so. 

Man alone, of all the animals, possesses no natural cov- 
ering, but is exposed naked to the inclemency of the ele- 
ments. What little hair he possesses is chiefly on the 
breast, where it is of little use as a covering, and on the 
* head, which in other animals is never better protected than 
the body. Mr. Darwin alleges that the first.men were hairy, 
like apes. Well, how did they lose their hair? Not by 
Natural Selection, which only perpetuates profitable varia- 
tions; but the loss of hair to an ape would be as unprofit- 
able as the loss of your clothes to you. Not by Sexual 
Selection, for there is not the slightest evidence that nudity 
was ever popular in apedom. We have undoubted evidence, 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



87 



in the two bone needles found with the bones of the man 
of Mentone, that the primeval men were naked, and com- 
plete proof that Natural Selection could not effect such a 
disadvantageous change had they been hairy. Here, then, 
we have an inferiority to other animals in the animal struc- 
ture, strangely at variance with the general superiority, and 
only to be accounted for as an educational provision. 
/ But chiefly in the human head does the great outward 
distinction appear. The brain is the great instrument with 
which the mind works. You can gauge the strength of 
Ulysses by his bow, and the bulk of the giant by the staff 
of his spear, which was like a weaver's beam. The brain 
of the largest ape is about thirty two cubic inches. The 
brains of the wildest Australians are more than double 
that capacity. They measure from seventy-five inches to 
ninety. Europeans' brains measure from ninety to one 
hundred inches. There are instances of Esquimaux meas- 
uring over ninety. Even the brain of an idiot is double 
the size of that of the orang otang. But how did man get 
this extraordinary development of brain, far beyond his 
necessities? For the cave man of Mentone, who hunted 
the bison, had as good a head as Bismarck. Natural Selec- 
tion could not develop an ape's brain in advance of his 
necessities. But here we have a prophetic structure; man's 
head developed far in advance of his necessities. Here is a 
power at work superior to Natural Selection. 

"With such an instrument man has gone to work and sup- 
plied his deficiencies. Inferior to many animals in strength 
and speed, he has manufactured weapons, and subdued 
them all, asserting himself as the lord of creation, conquer- 
ing even the mighty mastodon, and piercing the huge Cale- 
donian whale with his reindeer harpoon. He has remedied 
his want of hair by the manufacture of clothing from the 
spoils of his victims. He ha3 rendered himself independent 
of the weather by the shelter of his house. He has ceased 



88 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



to be dependent on the spontaneous fruits of the forest by 
the cultivation of the soil, and so has become a cosmopolite, 
confined to no province of creation. He has constructed 
ships, and provisioned them for long voyages, and visited, 
and colonized every coast of Europe, Asia, Africa, America, 
and Australia. He has formed civilized societies with laws, 
government, and religion. He has leveled roads, navigated 
rivers, tunneled mountains, dug navigable canals, constructed 
steamboats, built railroads, invented electric telegraphs, and 
steam printing presses ; and generally he has developed 
ideas of society, nationality, and of the universal brother- 
hood of man, not only not possible under the laws of Nat- 
ural Selection, but in the most direct contrariety to those 
laws, which work only for the benefit of the individual. 
Never under those laws could any great community of ani- 
mals be formed, never could they obtain the notion of rep- 
resentative government, never combine their powers for any 
national enterprise, nor could the most hairy and muscular- 
tailed of Mr. Darwin's ancestors secure subscribers sufficient 
to warrant him in starting even a county newspaper. 

But it is in the moral sense which enables man to distin- 
guish right from wrong, the conscience, which forbids and 
reproves the unbridled indulgence of the animal appetites, 
that we observe the grand distinction between man and the 
brute. There is nothing in the writings of evolutionists 
more pitiable than their attempts to degrade conscience into 
a mere gregarious instinct, an outcome of utility to the 
tribe, and to pleasurable sensations, resulting from the 
exercise of the social instincts. It would appear that these 
writers had so sophisticated their own minds that they have 
ceased to understand the fundamental, world-wide difference 
between right and gain, between duty and pleasure. " Do 
justice, though the heavens fall," could never be evolved by 
Natural Selection. That is the law of the sharpest tooth, 
and the longest claws, and the biggest bull ; the Napoleonic 



WAS YOUR MOTHER A MONKEY? 



89 



theology, whose god is always on the side of the strongest 
battalions ; the law of the perdition of the weak, and the 
survival of the strongest. In obedience to its laws the 
birds forsake their parents as soon as they can shift for 
themselves ; the herd tramples down the wounded deer ; the 
.wolves devour their wounded brothers ; the queen bee puts 
her sisters to death, and the neuters sacrifice all the males 
of the hive. In obedience to the laws of Natural Selection, 
the males fight for the most attractive females, and keep as 
many as they can, and form societies on that basis. 

But man has a sense of justice, and mercy, and gratitude, 
and love. Here is an animal who knows he ought to tell 
truth, and do right, and honor his parents, and respect and 
love his brethren. Whether he always does his duty or not, 
he feels and owns he ought to do it. Justice, and mercy, 
and the fear of God, are not at all the attributes of brutes, 
and never could have been produced by the evolution of 
their instincts. No animal possesses any knowledge of God, 
nor practices any form of religious worship. Religion, then, 
could not be the evolution of what has no existence. 

We have now considered the theory of the atheistical ev- 
olution of man, and of all plants and animals from one 
primeval germ, by the unintelligent operation of the powers 
of nature. We have seen that there are as many contra- 
dictory applications of the theory as there are advocates of 
it; that in any shape it is incoherent, illogical, and absurd; 
that it is destitute of any support from facts; that the al- 
leged analogy of embryology fails to give it countenance ; 
that the order of nature in its gradations is contradictory of 
the theory ; that it utterly fails to account for the origin of 
life, for the distinctness of the four classes of the animal 
kingdom, for the distinctness of species which refuse to 
breed together, for the absence of the intermediate forms 
necessary to the theory; and, above all, that it can give no 
satisfactory account of man's bodily, mental, and moral su- 



90 



WAS TOUR MOTHER A MONKEY ? 



periority to all other animals, nor for his possession of a 
knowledge of Glod. 

Its tendency, moreover, is inevitably to degrade man, to 
destroy that sense of his dignity which is the principal se- 
curity of human life, to obliterate a belief in the divine or- 
igin and sanction of morality, and in the existence of a 
future life of rewards and punishments, and so to promote 
the disorganization of society, and the degradation of men 
to the level of brutes, living only under the laws of their 
brutal instincts. For all these reasons we reject the theory 
as unscientific, absurd, degrading to man, and offensive to 
the God who made him. 



CHAPTER III. 



Js jGrOD pYERYBODY, AND pYERYBODY 

God? 



Pantheism is that perversion of reason and language 
which denies God's personality, and calls some imaginary 
soul of the world, or the world itself, by his name. While 
Pantheists are fully agreed upon the propriety of getting 
rid of a God who could note their conduct, and call them 
to account for it hereafter, and who would claim to exercise 
any authority over them here, they are by no means agreed, 
either in India, Germany, or America, as to what they shall 
call by his name. Public opinion necessitates them to say 
they believe in a God, but almost every one has his own pri- 
vate opinion as to what it is. We shall speak of it as we 
hear it pronounced from the lips of its prophets, here, as 
well as in the writings of its expounders, in Europe, and 
Asia. Some of them declare, that it is some absolutely 
unknown cause of all the phenomena of the universe, and 
others, that it is the universe itself. A large class speak of 
it as the great soul of the world, while the more materialis- 
tic regard it as the world itself, body and soul ; the soul being 
the sum of all the imponderable forces, such as gravitation, 
heat, light, electricity, magnetism, galvanism, vegetable and 
animal life, and especially the mesmeric influence, of which 
many of them regard intellect as a modification ; and the 
body being the sum of all the ponderable substances, such 
as air, water, earth, minerals, vegetables, and bodies of ani- 

(91) 



92 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 

mals and men. This creed is popularly expressed in the 
sentence so often heard, " Grod is everything, and everything 
is Grod." But this vast generalization of all things into the 
higher unity — this exalting of monkeys, men, snails, and 
paving stones to the same level of divinity— by no means 
meets the views of the more unphilosophical and aspiring 
gods and goddesses, for the very reason that it is so impar- 
tial. To deify a man and his cat by the same process is not 
much of a distinction to the former; and. of what advantage 
is it to be made a god, if he does not thereby obtain some 
distinction? This leveling apotheosis is generally confined 
to the Grerman Pantheists ; their more ambitious American 
brethren ascribe the contented humility which accepts it 
to the continual influence of the fumes of tobacco and lager 
beer. 

Man is the great deity of the other class. Renan boldly 
says: "For myself, I believe there is not in the universe an 
intelligence superior to that of man; the absolute of justice 
and reason manifests itself only in humanity ; regarded apart 
from humanity that absolute exists only as an abstraction. 
The infinite exists only when it clothes itself in form."* 
And as the soul of man is, rather inconsistently for people 
who believe everything Grod, supposed to be superior to the 
rest of him, they go off into great rhapsodies of adoration 
of their own souls. 

" The doctrine of the soul— first soul, and second soul, and 
evermore souV'-f — is the doctrine which is to regenerate the 
world. God, in their view, is nothing till he attains self- 
consciousness in man. " The universal does not attract us 
till housed in the individual. Who heeds the waste abyss 
of possibility? Standing on the bare ground, my head 
bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space, all 

*Cited in Pressense's Jesus Christ, His Life mid Times. Page 10. 
tEmerson. 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 93 

mere egotism vanishes. The currents of the universal being 
circulate through me. I am part or particle of God." "I 
stand here to say, ' Let us worship the mighty and trans- 
cendent soul.' " "God attains to self-consciousness only in 
the human soul." " Honor yourself." " Reverence your own 
individuality." "The soul of man is the highest intelli- 
gence in the universe." Such are the dogmas which, under 
the name of Philosophy, are poured forth oracularly, un- 
supported by reason or argument, by the prophets of the 
new dispensation — the last and highest achievement of the 
human intellect. 

It is very unfortunate, however, for the honor of the 
prophets of the nineteenth century, that this profound dis- 
covery was invented, and illustrated, patented, and peddled, 
by the Hindoos, among the people of India, two thousand 
years before the divinity had struggled into self conscious- 
ness in the mighty and transcendent souls of Schelling, 
Hegel, and Strauss, of Atkinson, Parker, or Emerson. We 
mean to show in this lecture, that it is an Antiquated, Hyp- 
ocritical, Demoralizing Atheism. 

1. Pantheism is an Antiquated Heresy. — It has rotted 
and putrefied among the worshipers of cats, and monkeys, 
and holy bulls, and bits of sticks and stones, on the banks of 
the Ganges, for more than two thousand years ; yet it is now 
hooked up out of its dunghill, and hawked about among 
Christian people, as a prime new discovery of modern phi- 
losophy for getting rid of Almighty God. As the Hindoo 
Shasters are undoubtedly the sources from which French, 
German, and American philosophers have borrowed their dog- 
mas, and as they have not had time to take the whole system, 
we shall edify the public by a view of this sublime theology 
as exhibited in the writings of the Pantheistic philosophers 
of India, as follows : 

"When existing in the temporary imperfect state of 
Sagun } Brahm (the Pantheist deity) wills to manifest the 



94 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 

universe. For this purpose he puts forth his omnipotent 
energy, which is variously styled in the different systems 
now under review. He puts forth his energy for what ? For 
the effecting of a creation out of nothing? 'No,' says one 
of the Shasters, but to 1 produce from his own divine sub- 
stance a multiform universe.' By the spontaneous exertion 
of this energy he sends forth, from his own divine substance, 
a countless host of essences, like innumerable sparks issuing 
from the blazing fire, or myriads of rays from the resplen- 
dent sun. These detached portions of Brahm — these sepa- 
rated divine essences — soon become individuated systems, 
destined, in time, to occupy different forms prepared for 
their reception ; whether these be fixed or movable, animate 
or inanimate, forms of gods or men, forms of animal, vege- 
table, or mineral existences. 

" Having been separated from Brahm in his imperfect state 
of Sagun, they carry along with them a share of those prin- 
ciples, qualities, and attributes that characterize that state, 
though predominating in very different degrees and propor- 
tions ; either according to their respective capacities, or the 
retributive awards of an eternal ordination. Among others 
it is specially noted, that as Brahm at that time had awak- 
ened into a consciousness of his own existence, there docs 
inhere in each separated soul a notion, or a conviction, of 
its own distinct, independent, individual existence. Labor- 
ing under this delusive notion, or conviction, the soul has 
lost the knowledge of its own proper nature — its divine or- 
igin, and ultimate destiny. It ignorantly regards itself as 
an inferior entity, instead of knowing itself to be what it 
truly is, a consubstantial, though it may be an infinitesi- 
mally minute portion of the great whole, a universal spirit. 

"Each individual soul being thus a portion of Brahm, 
even as a spark is of fire, it is again and again declared that 
the relation between them is not that of master and servant, 
ruler and ruled, but that of whole and part ! The soul is 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 95 

pronounced to be eternal a parte ante; in itself it has had 
no beginning or birth, though its separate individuality 
originated in time. It is eternal a parte post; it will have 
no end — no death; though its separate individuality will 
terminate in time. Its manifestation in time is not a crea- 
tion ; it is an effluence from the eternal fount of spirit. Its 
disappearance from the stage of time is not an extinction of 
essence — a reduction to nonentity; it is only a refluence into 
its original source. As an emanation from the supreme, 
eternal spirit, it is from everlasting to everlasting. Neither 
can it be said to be of finite dimensions ; on the contrary, 
says the sacred oracle, 'being identified with the Supreme 
Brahm, it participates in his infinity.' 

"After having enumerated all the elementary principles, 
atoms, and qualities successively evolved from Brahm, one 
of the sacred writings states, that though each of these had 
distinct powers, yet they existed separate and disunited, 
without order or harmonious adaptation of parts; that until 
they were duly combined together, it was impossible to pro- 
duce this universe, or animated beings ; and that therefore 
it was requisite to adopt other means than fortuitous chance 
for giving them an appropriate combination, and symmetri- 
cal arrangement. The Supreme, accordingly, produced an 
egg, in which the elementary principles might be deposited, 
and nurtured into maturity." "All the primary atoms, 
qualities, and principles — the seeds of future worlds— that 
had been evolved from the substance of Brahm, were now 
collected together, and deposited in the newly produced egg. 
And into it, along with them, entered the self-existent him- 
self, under the assumed form of Brahm ; and then he sat 
vivifying, expanding, and combining the elements, a whole 
year of the creation, or four thousand three hundred mil- 
lions of solar years ! During this amazing period, the won- 
drous egg floated like a bubble on the abyss of primeval 
waters, increasing in size, and blazing refulgent as a thousand 



96 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 



suns. At length the Supreme, who dwelt therein, burst the 
shell of the stupendous egg, and issued forth under a new 
form, with a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, and a thou- 
sand arms. Along with him there issued forth another 
form, huge and measureless. What could that be? All the 
elementary principles having now been matured, and disposed 
into an endless variety of orderly collocations, and combined 
into one harmonious whole, they darted into visible mani- 
festation under the form of the present glorious universe ! 
A universe now finished, and ready made, with its entire 
apparatus, of earth, sun, moon, and stars. What, then, is 
this multiform universe ? It is but a harmoniously arranged 
expansion of primordial principles and qualities. And 
whence are these? Educed or evolved from the divine sub- 
stance of Brahin. Hence it is that the universe is so con- 
stantly spoken of, even by mythologists, as a manifested 
form of Brahin himself, the supreme, invisible spirit. Hence, 
too, under the notion that it is the manifestation of a being 
who may assume every variety of corporeal form, is the uni- 
verse often personified, or described as if its different parts 
were only the different members of a person, of prodigious 
magnitude, in human form. It is declared that the hairs of 
his body are the trees of the forest; of his head, the clouds; 
of his beard, the lightning. His breath is the circling at- 
mosphere; his voice, the thunder; his eyes, the sun and 
moon; his veins, the rivers; his nails, the rocks; his bones, 
the lofty mountains!* 

i: The substantial fabrics of all worlds having now beea 
framed and fitted up as the destined abodes of different or- , 
ders of being, celestial, terrestrial, and infernal, the question 
next arises, How or by whom were produced the various or- 
ganized forms which these orders of being were designed to 
animate? Though hosts of subtle essences or souls flowed 



* Duff's India, pages 99-114. 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 97 



forth from Brahm, all of these remain inactive till united to 
some form of materialism. From this necessity the gods 
themselves are not exempted. While the souls of men, and 
other inferior spirits, must be encased in tabernacles fash- 
ioned out of the grosser elements, the souls of the gods, 
and all other superior spirits, must be made to inhabit ma- 
terial forms, composed of one or other of the infinitely at- 
tenuated and invisible rudimental atoms that spring direct 
from the principle of consciousness. 

" Interminable as are the incoherencies, inconsistencies, 
and extravagancies of the Hindoo sacred writings, on no 
subject, perhaps, is the multiplicity of varying accounts and 
discrepancies more astonishing than on the present. Vol- 
umes could not suffice to retail them all. Brahma's first 
attempts at the production of the forms of animated beings 
were as eminently unsuccessful as they were various. At 
one time he is said to have performed a long and severe 
course of ascetic devotions, to enable him to accomplish his 
wish; but in vain; at another, inflamed by anger and pas- 
sion at his repeated failures, he sat down and wept; and 
from the streaming tear-drops sprang into being, as his first 
boon, a progeny of ghosts and goblins, of an aspect so loath- 
some and dreadful, that he was ready to faint away. At one 
time,* after profound meditation, different beings spring 
forth : one from his thumb, another from his breath, a third 
from his ear, a fourth from his side. But enough of such 
monstrous legends."* 

There now, reader, you have the original of the Develop- 
ment Theory, with Vestiges of Creation enough to make 
half a dozen new infidel cosmogonies, besides the genuine 
original of Pantheism, from its native soil. Our western 
Pantheists will doubtless reverence their venerable progeni- 
tors; and, should the remainder of the family find their 

*DufF s India, page 119. 



98 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 

way here in a year or two, via Germany, the public will be 
better prepared to give a fitting reception to snch distin- 
guished visitors, including their suite of divine bulls and 
holy monkeys, their lustrations of cow dung, ecstatic hook 
swingings, burning of widows, and drowning of children, 
and other Pantheistic Philosophies, from the banks of the 
Ganges. What an outrage of decency for such men to call 
themselves philosophers and Christians ! 

The relationship of American Pantheism with that of 
India is unblushingly acknowledged by the recent Pantheis- 
tic writers: "When ancient sages came to believe in the 
absolute goodness, justice, love, and wisdom of the deity, 
or providence, they fell into that peace which needed noth- 
ing, feared nothing, and therefore worshiped nothing. Noth- 
ing to blame, nothing to praise ; the perfect whole became 
one great divinity. It was so in Magadha and Benares ; it 
is so in Concord and Boston."* 

2. Pantheism is a System of Deception and Hypocrisy. — 
Has any man a right to pervert the English language, by 
fixing new meanings to words, entirely different from and 
contrary to those in common use? If he knows the mean- 
ing of the words he uses, and uses them to convey a con- 
trary meaning, he is a deceiver. The name God, used as a 
proper name, in the English tongue, means " the Supreme 
Being; Jehovah; the Eternal and Infinite Spirit, the Crea- 
tor and Sovereign of the Universe. "f If, then, a man says 
he believes in God, but when forced to explain what he 
means by that name, says he means steam, heat, electricity, 
galvanism, magnetism, mesmeric force, odyle, animal life, 
the soul of man, or the sum of all the intelligences in the 
universe, he is a deceiver, and vain talker, abusing language 
to conceal his impiety. Pantheism is simply Jesuitical 



*Man's Origin and Destiny, 293. 
t Webster's Dictionary. 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 90 



Atheism. Willing to dethrone Jehovah, but unable and 
unwilling to place any other being in his stead, as Creator 
and Ruler of the universe, yet conscious that mankind will 
never embrace open Atheism, Pantheists profess to believe 
in God, only that they may steal his name to cloak their 
Atheism. We, in common with all who believe in God, 
demand, that, as their divinity is, by their own confession, 
essentially different from God, they shall use a different 
word to describe it. Let them call it Brahm, as their breth- 
ren in India do, or any other name not appropriated to any 
existing being in heaven or earth, or under the earth ; and 
let them cease to profane religion, and insult common sense, 
by affixing the holy name of the Supreme to their thousand- 
headed monster. 

But the very perfection of Jesuitism is reached, when 
Pantheists profess their high respect for the Christian relig- 
ion. They do not generally speak of it as a superstition, 
though some of the vulgar sort do ; nor do they decry its 
mysteries, as Deists are in the habit of doing; nor, as So- 
cinians, and Unitarians, and Ptationalists, do they attempt to 
reduce it to a mere code of morals. They grant it to be 
the highest development of humanity yet reached by the 
majority of the human race. The brute, the savage, the 
polytheistic idolater, the star worshiper, the monotheist, 
the Christian, are all, in their scheme, so many successive 
developments of humanity in its upward progress. There 
is only one step higher than Christianity, and that is Pan- 
theism. Well knowing that Christianity is diametrically 
opposed to their falsehoods, and that the Bible, everywhere, 
teaches that the natural progress of man has ever been down 
from a state of holiness to idolatry and barbarism, they 
have yet the hardihood to profess respect for it, as a system 
of concealed Pantheism, and to clothe their abominations in 
Scripture language. They speak, for instance, of the 
" beauty of holiness in the mind, that has surmounted 



100 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 

every idea of a personal God;" and of "God dwelling in 
us, and his love perfected in us," when they believe that he 
dwells as really in every creature : in that hog, for instance. 
Then they will readily acknowledge that the Bible is in- 
spired. They can accept— that is the phrase — they can ac- 
cept the Book which denounces death upon those fools who, 
"professing themselves to be wise, change the truth of God 
into a lie, and worship and serve the creature more than the 
Creator," as merely a mystic revelation of the Pantheism 
which leaves man to "erect everything into a God, provided 
it is none : sun, moon, stars, a cat, a monkey, an onion, un- 
couth idols, sculptured marble; nay, a shapeless trunk, 
which the devout impatience of the idolater does not stay 
to fashion into the likeness of a man, but gives its apotheo- 
sis at once." Oh, yes; they accept the Bible as inspired — 
a God inspired Book — inasmuch as every product of the 
human mind is a development of Deity. The Bible, then, 
when we have the matter fully explained, is quite on a level 
with Gulliver's Travels, or Emerson's Address to a Senior 
Class of Divinity. 

There is nothing, however, in this vast system of mon- 
strosities, which fills the soul of a Christian with such loath- 
ing and detestation, as to hear Pantheists profess their ven- 
eration for the Lord Jesus, and claim him as a teacher of 
Pantheism. If there is one object which they detest with 
all their hearts, it is the J udge of the quick and dead, and 
the vengeance which he shall take upon them that know not 
God, and obey not the gospel. Any allusion to the judg- 
ment seat of Christ fills them with fury, and causes them 
to pour forth awful blasphemies. They know that the Lord 
Jesus repeatedly declared himself the Judge of the living 
and the dead — that "the hour is coming in which all that 
are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth : 
they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life, and 
they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damna- 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 101 



tion;" and that the very last sentence of his public dis- 
courses is, "And these " (the wicked) " shall go away into ever- 
lasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal." 
When they drop the mask for a moment, they can accuse 
apostles and disciples with "dwelling with noxious exagger- 
ation about the person of Christ."* Christ, as revealed in 
the gospel, they hate with a perfect hatred. But when it 
becomes necessary to address Christians, and beguile them 
into the deceitfulness of Pantheism, the tune is changed. 
Christ becomes the model man — " one conceived in condi- 
tions favorable to the highest perfectibility of the individual 
consciousness; and so possessed of powers of generalization 
far in advance of the age in which he lived. They can 
listen to and honor one of the best expounders of God and 
nature in the Man of Nazareth. "f The vilest falsehoods of 
Pantheism are ascribed to Jesus, that those who, ignorant 
of his doctrine, yet respect his name, may be seduced to 
receive them. Of him who declared, " Out of the heart of 
man proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, thefts, false 
witness, blasphemies," they have the hardihood to declare, 
" He saw with open eyes the mystery of the soul ; alone, in 
all history, he estimated the greatness of man." Calculat- 
ing upon that ignorance of the teaching of Christ which is 
so general among their audiences, they dare to represent the 
only begotten Son of God as teaching Pantheism: "One 
man was true to what is in you and me ; he saw that God 
incarnates himself in man, and evermore goes forth anew to 
take possessson of his world. He said in this jubilee of 
sublime emotion, 'I am divine. Through me God acts; 
through me, speaks. Would you see God, see me ; or see 
thee when thou also thinkest as I now think.' Because the 

^Emerson's Address to a Senior Class in Divinity. 

fHennell's Christian Theism, which shows how Theists of every 
nation — Christian, Jew, Mohammedan, or Chinese— can meet upon 
common ground. 



102 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 

indwelling Supreme Spirit can not wholly be got rid of, the 
doctrine of it suffers this perversion, that the divine nature 
is attributed to one or two persons, and denied to all the 
rest, and denied with fury." Yes, truly, the divine nature 
is emphatically denied to all unregeneratecl men, and denied, 
too, by that divine teacher thus eulogized. Hear him : " Ye 
do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We 
be not born of fornication ; we have one Father, even God. 
J esus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would 
love me ; for I proceeded forth and came from God ; neither 
came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not under- 
stand my speech? Even because ye can not hear my word. 
Ye are of your father, the devil; and the works of your 
father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, 
and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in 
him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh it of his own j 
for he is a liar, and the father of it." 

Let Pantheists, then, cease to wind their serpent coils 
around Christianity, and to defile the Bible with their filthy 
lickings. The Lord Jesus will not suffer such persons to 
bear even a true testimony to him, and his followers will not 
permit them to ascribe their falsehoods to him, without re- 
proof. Let them stand out and avow themselves the ene- 
mies of Christ and his gospel, as they are, and cease their 
abominable pretenses of giving to the world the ultimate 
development of Christianity. What concord hath Christ 
with Belial? 

3. Pantheism is a System of Immorality. — It loosens all 
the sanctions of moral law. If there is anything upon which 
all Pantheists are agreed, it is in the denial of the resur- 
rection, the judgment, and the future punishment of the 
wicked. Their whole system, in all its range, from Spirit- 
ualism to Phrenology, is expressly invented to get rid of 
God's moral government. If man is the highest intelli- 
gence in the universe, to whom should he render an account 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 103 

of his conduct? Or who would have any right to call him 
to account? Then, if we are developments of deity, deity 
can not offend against itself. Further, if our development, 
both of body and mind, be the inevitable result of the laws 
of nature — of our organization and our position — man is 
but the creature of circumstances, and, therefore, as is 
abundantly argued, can not be made responsible for laws and 
their results, over which he has no control. " I am what I 
am. I can not alter my will, or be other than what I am, 
and can not deserve either reward or punishment."* Before 
hundreds of the citizens of Cincinnati, a lecturer publicly 
denied the right of either God or man to invade his indi- 
viduality, by taking vengeance upon him for any crime 
whatever. Thousands, who are not yet Pantheists, are so 
far infected with the poison that they utterly deny any 
right of vindictive punishment to God or man. 

But this is not all. Again and again have we listened 
with astonishment to men, declaring that there was no moral 
law — no standard of right and wrong, but the will of the 
community. Of course it was quite natural, after such a 
declaration, to assert that a wife who should remain with a 
husband of inferior intellectuality, or unsuitable emotions, 
was committing adultery ; that private property is a legal- 
ized robbery; and that when a citizen becomes mentally or 
physically unfit for the business of life, he confers the high- 
est obligation on society, and performs the highest duty to 
himself, by committing suicide, and thus returning to the 
great ocean of being ! 

We might think that confusion of right and wrong could 
not be worse confounded than this ; yet there is a blacker 
darkness still. The distinction between good and evil is ab- 
solutely denied. The Hindoo Pantheists declare that they 
can not sin, because they are God, and God can not offend 



** Atkinson's Letters, page 190. 



104: IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 

against himself; there is no sin — it is all maya — delusion. 
So the American and English school tells us it lives only in 
the obsolete theology. Evil, we are told, "is good in an- 
other way we are not skilled in."* So says the author of 
"Representative Men." " Evil," according to old philoso- 
phers, "is good in the making; that pure malignity can ex- 
ist is the extreme proposition of unbelief. It is not to be 
entertained by a rational agent. It is Atheism ; it is the 
last profanation." "The divine effort is never relaxed; the 
carrion in the sun will convert itself into grass and flow- 
ers; and man, though in brothels, or jails, or on gibbets, is 
on his way to all that is good and true."f 

Emerson, in a lecture in Cincinnati, is reported by the 
editor of The Central Herald, as saying in his hearing: "To 
say that the majority of men are wicked, is only to say that 
they are young." "Everyman is indebted to his vices — 
virtues grow out of them as a thrifty and fruitful plant 
grows out of manure." "There is hope even for the rep- 
robate, and the ruffian, in the fullness of time." 

If these were only the ravings of lunatics, or the dream- 
ings of philosophers, we should never have hunted them 
from their hiding-places to scare your visions; but these 
doctrines are weekly propounded in your own city, and 
throughout our land, from platform and press, to thousands 
of your children and their school-teachers, of your work, 
men and your lawgivers, to your wives and daughters. Again 
and again have our ears been confounded in the squares of 
New York, and the streets of Philadelphia, and the market- 
places of Cincinnati, by the boisterous cry, What is sin? 
There is no sin. It is all an old story. Let men who fear 
no God, but who have lives, and wives, and property to lose, 
look to it, and say if they act wisely in giving their influ- 
ence to a system which lands in such consequences. Let 

* Pestus, page 48. 

t Swedenborg, or the Mystic (quoted by Pierson, 41), p. 68. 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 



105 



them devise some religion for the people which will preserve 
the rights of man, while giving license to trample upon the 
rights of God ; or, failing in the effort, let them acknowledge 
that the enemy of God is, and of necessity must be, the 
foe of all that constitutes the happiness of man. Impiety 
and immorality are wedded in heaven's decree, and man can 
not sunder them. 

4. Pantheism is Virtually Atheism. — It may scarce seem 
needful to multiply proofs on this head. How can any one 
imagine a being composed of the sum of all the intelligences 
of the universe? Such a thing, or combination of things, 
never was distinctly conceived of by any intelligent being. 
Can intelligences be compounded, or like bricks and mortar, 
piled upon each other? If they could, did these finite in- 
telligences create themselves? If the soul of man is the 
highest intelligence in the universe, did the soul of man 
create, or does the soul of man govern it? Shall we adore 
his soul? Some Pantheists have got just to this length. M. 
Comte declares, that "At this present time, for minds prop- 
erly familiarized with true astronomical philosophy, the 
heavens display no other glory than that of Hipparchus, or 
Kepler, or Newton, and of all who have helped to establish 
these laws." Establish these laws ! Laws by which the 
heavenly bodies were guided thousands of years before Kep- 
ler or Newton were born. Shall we then adore the souls of 
Kepler and Newton? M. Comte has invented a religion, 
which he is much displeased that the admirers of his Posi- 
tive Philosophy will not accept, in which the children are 
to be taught to worship idols, the youth to believe in one 
God, if they can, after such a training in infancy, and the 
full-grown men are to adore a Grand Etre, "the continuous 
resultant of all the forces capable of voluntarily concurring 
in the universal perfectioning of the world, not forgetting our 
worthy auxiliaries, the animals."* Our Anglo-Saxon Pan- 

* Politique Positive, Vol. II. page GO. 



103 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 

theists, however, are not quite philosophical enough yet to 
adore the mules and oxen, and therefore refuse worship al- 
together. " Work is worship," constitutes their liturgy. 
"As soon as the man is as one with God, he will not beg. 
He will then see prayer in all action."* "Labor wide as 
earth has its summit in heaven. Sweat of the brow, and up 
from that to sweat of the brain, sweat of the heart; which 
includes all Kepler calculations, Newton meditations, all 
sciences, all spoken epics, all acted heroisms, martyrdoms, 
up to that agony of bloody sweat, which all men have ac- 
counted divine ! Oh, brother, if this is not worship, then 
I say, the more pity for worship; for this is the noblest 
thing yet discovered under God's sky." "No man has 
worked, or can work, except religiously. "f "Adieu, 
Church! Thy road is that way, mine is this. In God's 
name, adieu! "J 

Such is the theory. How faithfully acted out, you can 
learn from the thousands who are now, publicly, upon God's 
holy Sabbath, working religiously upon the bridge that is to 
span the river, or less ostentatiously in their shops and work- 
rooms throughout the city. Within a circle of three miles' 
radius of the spot you now occupy, one hundred thousand 
intelligent beings in this Christian city worship no God. 

The abstraction, which the Pantheist calls God, is no ob- 
ject of worship. It is not to be loved. If it does good, it 
could not help it, and did not intend it. It is not to be 
thanked for benefits. It, the sum of all the intelligence of 
the universe, can not be collected from the seven spheres to 
receive any such acknowledgment. It can not deviate from 
its fated course of proceeding; therefore, says the Pantheist, 
why should I pray? It neither sees his conduct, nor cares 
for it; and he denies any right to call him to account. It 
did not create him, does not govern him, will not judge him, 

* Emerson, f Carlyle — Past and Present, t Carlyle— Life of 
Sterling. » 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 107 



can not punish him. It is no object of love, fear, worship, 
or obedience. It is no god. He is an Atheist. He believes 
not in any God. 

Hear, Israel! the Lord our God is one Lord. 
He is distinct from, and supreme over all his works. He 
now rules, and will hereafter judge all intelligent creatures, 
and will render to every one according to his works. 

1. Reason declares it. The world did not make itself. 
The soul of man did not make itself. The body of man did 
not make itself. They must have had an intelligent Crea- 
tor, who is God. God is known by his works to be distinct 
from them, and superior to them. The work is not the 
workman. The house is not the builder. The watch is not 
the watchmaker. The sum of all the works of any worker 
is not the agent who produced them. Let an architect 
spend his life in building a city, yet the city is not the 
builder. The maker is always distinct from, and superior 
to, the thing made. You and I, and the universe, are made. 
Our Maker, then, is distinct from, and superior to us. One 
plan gives order to the universe; therefore, one mind orig- 
inated it. The Creator is over all his creatures. 

2. Our consciousness confirms it. If a blind god could 
not make a seeing man, a god destitute of the principle of 
self-consciousness (if such an abuse of language may be 
tolerated for a moment) could not impart to man the con- 
viction, / am — the ineradicable belief that I am not the 
world, nor any other person; much less, everybody; but 
that I am a person, possessed of powers of knowing, think- 
ing, liking and disliking, judging, approving of right, and 
disapproving of wrong, and choosing and willing my con- 
duct. My Maker has at least as much common sense as he 
has given me. He that teacheth man knowledge, shall he 
not know? 

3. Our ignorance and weakness demand a Governor of the 
world wiser than ourselves. The soul of man is not the high- 



108 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD ? 



est intelligence in the universe. It can not know the mode 
of its own operation on the body it inhabits, much less the 
plan of the world's management. Man may know much 
about what does not concern him, and about things over 
which he has no control ; but it is the will of God that his 
pride should feel the curb of ignorance and impotence where 
his dearest interests are concerned, that so he may be com- 
pelled to acknowledge that God is greater than man. He 
may be able to tell the place of the distant planets a thou- 
sand years hence, but he can not tell where himself shall 
be next year. He can calculate for years to come the mo- 
tions of the tides, which he can not control, but can not tell 
how his own pulse shall beat, or whether it shall beat at all, 
to-morrow. Ever as his knowledge of the laws by which 
God governs the world increases, his conviction of his im- 
potence grows ; and he sees and feels that a wiser head and 
stronger hand than that of any creature, planned and ad- 
ministered them. Ever as he reaches some ultimate truth, 
such as the mystery of electricity, of light, of life, of grav- 
itation, which he can not explain, and beyond which he can 
not penetrate, he hears the voice of God therein, demand- 
ing him to acknowledge his impotence. 

"Where is the way where light dwelleth, 

"And as for darkness, what is the place thereof? 

"Canst thou bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, 

"Or loose the bands of Orion? 

"Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his seasons? 

"Or canst thou guide Arcturus, with his sons? 

"Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? 

"Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth? 

" Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, 

"'That abundance of waters may cover thee? 

" Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go 

"And say unto thee, £ Here we are ? ' " 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 109 



4. Our consciences convince us that God is a Moral Gov- 
ernor. The distinction between brutes and men is, that man 
has a sense of the distinction between right and wrong. If 
we find a tribe of savages, or individuals who indulge their 
appetites without rule, and who do wrong without any ap- 
parent remorse or shame, we designate them brutes. Even 
those who in words deny any difference between right and 
wrong, do in fact admit its existence, by their attempts to 
justify that opinion. Though weaker, or less regarded in 
some than in others, every man is conscious of a faculty in 
himself which sits in judgment on his own conduct, and 
that of others, approving or condemning it as right or 
wrong. In all lands, and in all ages, the common sense of 
mankind has acknowledged the existence and moral author- 
ity of conscience, as distinct from and superior to mere in- 
tellect. No language of man is destitute of words convey- 
ing the ideas of virtue and vice, of goodness and wickedness. 
When one attempts to deceive you by a willful lie, you are 
sensible not only of an intellectual process of reason detect- 
ing the error, but of a distinct judgment of disapprobation 
of the crime. When one who has received kindness from 
a benefactor, neglects to make any acknowledgment of it, 
cherishes no feelings of gratitude, and insults and abuses the 
friend who succored him, we are conscious, not merely of the 
facts, as phenomena to be observed, but of the ingratitude, 
as a crime to be detested. And we arc irresistibly constrained 
to believe that he who taught us this knowledge of a differ- 
ence between right and wrong, does himself know such a 
distinction; and that he who implanted this feeling of ap- 
proval of right, and condemnation of wrong, in us, does him- 
self approve the right, and condemn the wrong. And as 
we can form no notion of risvht or wrons; unconnected with 
the idea that approbation of right conduct should be suit- 
ably expressed, and that disapprobation of wrong conduct 
ought also to be suitably expressed — in other words, that 



110 IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? 

right ought to be rewarded, and wrong ought to be punished 
— so we are constrained to trace such a connection from our 
minds to the mind of him who framed them. This convic- 
tion is God's law, written in our hearts. When we do 
wrong, we become conscious of a feeling of remorse in our 
consciences, as truly as the eye becomes conscious of the 
darkness. "We may blind the eye, and we may sear the con- 
science, that the one shall not see, nor the other feel ; but 
light and darkness, right and wrong, will exist. The awful 
fact which conscience reveals to us, that we sin against God, 
that we know the right, and do the wrong, and are conscious 
of it, and of God's disapprobation of it, is conclusive proof 
that we are not only distinct from God, but separate from 
him — that we oppose our wills against his. And every pang 
of remorse is a premonition of God's judgment, and every 
sorrow and suffering which the Governor of the world has 
connected with sin - as the drunkard's loss of character and 
property, of peace and happiness, the frenzy of his soul, and 
the destruction of his body — is a type afcd teaching of the 
curse which he has denounced against sin. 

5. The World's History is the record of man's crimes, and 
God's punishments. Once God swept the human race from 
earth with a flood of water, because the wickedness of man 
was great on the earth. Again, he testified his displeasure 
against the ungodly sinners of Sodom and Gomorrah, by 
consuming their cities with fire from heaven, and leaving the 
Dead Sea to roll its solemn waves of warning to all ungodly 
f sinners, to the end of time. 

By the ordinary course of his providence, he has ever se- 
cured the destruction of ungodly nations. No learning, 
commerce, arms, territories, or skill, has ever secured a re- 
bellious nation against the sword of God's justice. Ask 
the black record of a rebel world's history for an instance. 
Egypt, Canaan, Nineveh, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome. 
Where are they now? Tyre had ships, colonies, and com- 



IS GOD EVERYBODY, AND EVERYBODY GOD? Ill 

merce ; Home an empire on which the sun never set ; Greece 
had philosophy, arts, and liberty secured by a confederation 
of republics ; Spain the treasures of earth's gold and silver, 
and the possession of half the globe. Did these secure 
them against the moral government of God? 

No ! God's law sways the universe ; that law which, with 
the brazen fetters of eternal justice, binds together sin and 
misery, crime and punishment, and lays the burden on the 
backs of all ungodly nations, irresistibly forcing them down 
— down — down the road to ruin. The vain imagination that 
refuses to glorify God as God, leads to darkness of heart, 
thence to Atheism, thence to gross idolatry, onward to sel- 
fish gratification, violent rapacity, lust of conquest, and lux- 
ury, licentiousness, and effeminacy begotten of its spoils; 
then military tyranny, civil war, servile revolt, anarchy, 
famine and pestilence, and the sword of less debauched 
neighbors, Christ's iron scepter, hurl them down from the 
pinnacle of greatness, to dash them in pieces against each 
other, in the valley of destruction; and there they lie, 
wrecks of nations, ruins of empires, naught remaining, save 
some shivered potsherds of former greatness, to show that 
once they were, and were the enemies of God. 

Oh, America, take warning ere it be too late ! God rules 
the nations. "He that chastiseth the heathen, shall he not 
correct you?" 

A day of retribution, reader, comes to you, as an individ- 
ual. Neither your insignificance nor your unbelief can hide 
you from his eye, nor can your puny arm shield you from 
his righteous judgment. His hand shall find out his ene- 
mies. Oh, fly from the wrath to come! "Seek the Lord 
while he may be found." He is not far from every one of 
us. His breath is in our nostrils. His Word is in our 
hands. "Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord 
shall be saved." 



CHAPTER IV. 




aye We Any Need of the Bible? 



Religion consists of the knowledge of a number of great 
facts, and of a course of life suitable to them. We have 
seen three of these : that Grod created the world ; that he 
governs it ; and that he is able to conquer his enemies. 
There are others of the same sort as needful to be known. 
Our knowledge of these facts, or our ignorance of them, 
makes not the slightest difference in the facts themselves. 
Grod is. and heaven is, and hell is, and sin leads to it, whether 
anybody believes these things or not. It makes no sort of 
difference in the beetling cliff and swollen flood that sweeps 
below it, that the drunken man declares there is no danger, 
and, refusing the proffered lantern, gallops on toward it in 
the darkness of the night. But when the mangled corpse 
is washed ashore, every one sees how foolish this man was, 
to be so confident in his ignorance as to refuse the lantern, 
which would have shown him his danger, and guided him to 
the bridge where he might have crossed in safety. Some of 
the facts of religion lie at the evening end of life's journey; 
the darkness of death's night hides them from mortal eye ; 
and living men might guide their steps the better by asking 
counsel of one who knows the way. If they get along no 
better by their own counsel in the next world than most of 
them do in this, they will have small cause to bless their 
teacher. Who can tell that ignorance, and wickedness, and 
wretchedness are not as tightly tied together in the world 
to come, as we see them here ? 





(112) 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 113 

Solomon was a knowing man and wise ; and better than 
that, in the esteem of most people, he made money, and 
tells you how to make it, and keep it. You will make a 
hundred dollars by reading his Proverbs and acting on them. 
They would have saved some of you many a thousand. Of 
course such a man knew something of the world. He was 
a wide-awake trader. His ships coasted the shores of Asia, 
and Africa, from Madagascar to Japan ; and the overland 
mail caravans from India and China drew up in the depots 
he built for them in the heart of the desert. He knew the 
well-doing people with whom trade was profitable, and the 
savages who could only send apes and peacocks. He was a 
philosopher as well as a trader, and could not help being 
deeply impressed with the great fact, that there was a wide 
difference among the nations of the world. Some were en- 
lightened, enterprising, civilized, and flourishing; others 
were naked savages, living in ignorance, poverty, vice, and 
starvation, perpetually murdering one another, and dying 
out of the earth. 

Solomon noticed another great fact. In his own country, 
and in Chaldea, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and some others, God 
had revealed his will to certain persons for the benefit of 
their neighbors. He did so generally by opening the eyes 
of these prophets to see future events, and the great facts 
of the unseen world, and by giving them messages of warn- 
ing and instruction to the nations. From this mode of rev- 
elation, by opening the prophets' eyes to see realities invisi- 
ble to others, they were called seers, and the revelations 
they were commissioned to make were called visions ; and 
revelation from Grod was called, in general, vision. Solomon 
was struck with the fact that some nations were thus favored 
by God, and other nations were not. The question would 
naturally arise, What difference does it make, or does it 
make any difference, whether men have any revelation of 
God's will or not? 
8 



114 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



Solomon was led to observe a third great fact The na- 
tions which were favored with these revelations were the 
civilized, enterprising, and comparatively prosperous nations. 
In proportion to the amount of divine revelation they had, 
and their obedience to it, they prospered. The nations that 
had no revelation from God were the idolatrous savages, who 
were sinking down to the level of brutes, and perishing off 
the face of the earth. He daguerreotypes these three great 
facts in the proverb : " Where there is no vision the people 
perish ; but he that keepeth the law, happy is he." 

Oh, says the Rationalist, the world is wiser now than it was 
in Solomon's days. He lived in the old mythological period, 
when men attributed everything extraordinary to the gods. 
But the world is too wise now to believe in any supernatural 
revelation. " The Hebrew and Christian religions like all 
others have their myths." " The fact is, the pure historic 
idea was never developed among the Hebrews during the 
whole of their political existence." " When, therefore, we 
meet ~with an account of certain phenomena, or events of 
which it is expressly stated or implied that they were pro- 
duced immediately by Grod himself (such as divine appari- 
tions, voices from heaven, and the like), or by human beings 
possessed of supernatural powers (miracles, prophecies, 
etc.), such an account is so far to be considered not historical." 
" Indeed, no just notion of the true nature of history is pos- 
sible without a perception of the inviolability of the chain 
of finite causes, and of the impossibility of miracles."* A 
narrative is to be deemed mythical, 1st. " When it proceeds 
from an age in which there were no written records, but 
events were transmitted by tradition ; 2d. When it presents, 
as historical, accounts of events which were beyond the 
reach of experience, as occurrences connected with the spir- 
itual world ; or 3d. When it deals in the marvelous, and is 



^Strauss' Life of Jesus, 64, 74, 87. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OP THE BIBLE? 115 

couched in symbolical language."* So also a host of others, 
who pass for biblical expositors, lay it down as an axiom, 
that all records of supernatural events are mythical, viz : 
fables, falsehoods, because miracles are impossible. Of 
course, from such premises the conclusion is easy. A reve- 
lation from God to man is a supernatural event, and super- 
natural events are impossible ; therefore, a revelation from 
God is impossible. But it would have been much easier, 
and quite as logical, to have laid down the axiom in plain 
words at first, that a revelation from God is impossible, as to 
argue it from such premises ; for it is just as easy to say, 
that a revelation from God is impossible, as to say that mira- 
cles are impossible ; and as for proof of either one or the 
other, we must just take their word for it. 

One can not help being amazed at the cool impudence 
with which these men take for granted the very point to be 
proved, and set aside, as unworthy of serious examination, 
the most authentic records of history, simply because they 
do not coincide with their so-called philosophy ; and at the 
credulity with which their followers swallow this arrogant 
dogmatism, as if it were self-evident truth. Let us look at 
it for a moment. Other religions have their myths, or 
fables, therefore, the Hebrew and Christian records are 
fables, says the Rationalist. Profundity of logic ! Counter- 
feit bank bills are common, therefore none are genuine. 
" The fact is, the pure historic idea was never developed 
among the Hebrews," i. e., Moses and the prophets were all 
liars. That is the fact, you may take my word for it. " In- 
deed, no just notion of the true nature of history is possible 
without a perception of the inviolability of the chain of 
finite causes, and of the impossibility of miracles" — which 
translated into plain words is simply this : No man can un- 
derstand history who believes in God Almighty. " A narra- 



*Bauer's Hebrew Mythology. 



116 HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 

tive is to be deemed fabulous wben it proceeds from an 
age in which there were no written records," such, for 
instance, as any account of the creation of the first man — 
for no event could possibly happen unless there was a scribe 
there to write it. Or, of the fall of man — we do not know that 
Adam was able to write, and no man can tell truth unless he 
writes a history. " A narrative is to be deemed fabulous 
when it presents, as historical, accounts of events which were 
beyond the reach of experience, as events connected with 
the spiritual world." Is it not self-evident that you and I 
have had experience of everything in the whole universe, 
and whoever tells us anything which we have never seen is 
a liar. " When a narrative deals in the marvelous," such as 
Xenophon's Retreat of the Ten Thousand, Herodotus' His- 
tory, or Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 
dealing as it does in such marvelous accounts as the death 
of half the inhabitants of the empire in the reign of Gale- 
rius, or any other history of wonderful occurrence — it is of 
course a myth. Does not every one know that nothing mar- 
velous ever happened, or, if it did, would any historian 
trouble himself to record a prodigy? " Or, if it is couched in 
symbolical language," as is every eloquent passage in Thu- 
cydides, Robertson, Gibbon, or Guizot, the records of China, 
and of India, the picture-writing of the Peruvians, and es- 
pecially the Egyptian hieroglyphics, which were fondly ex- 
pected to do such good service against the Bible — it must 
be at once rejected, without further examination, as mytho- 
logical and unworthy of any credit whatever. Thus we are 
conclusively rid forever of the Bible, for sure enough it is 
couched in symbolical language. Blessed deliverance to the 
world ! But then, alas ! this great deliverance is accom- 
panied with several little inconveniences. All poetry, three- 
fourths of the world's history, and the largest part of its 
philosophy, is couched in symbolical language, and especially 
the whole of the science of metaphysics, from which these 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 117 

very learned writers have deduced such edifying conclusions, 
is, from the beginning to the end, nothing but a symbolical 
application of the terms which describe material objects, to 
the phenomena of mind. Alas ! we must forever relinquish 
"the absolute," and "the infinite," and "the conditioned," 
with all their " affinities and potencies," up to " higher uni- 
ty," and "the rhythm of universal existence," and all the 
rest of those perspicuous German hieroglyphics, whether en- 
tombed in their native pyramids for the amazement of suc- 
ceeding generations, by Fichte, Schelling, or Hegel, or 
"worshiping in the great cathedral of the immensities," 
"with their heads uplifted into infinite space," or "lying 
on the plane of their own consciousness," in the writings of 
Carlyle, Emerson, and Parker. They are myths, the whole 
of them, for they " are couched in symbolical language 
and Bauer, De Wette, and Strauss have pronounced every 
thing couched in symbolical language to be mythical. Let 
us henceforth deliver our minds from all anxiety about his- 
tory, philosophy, or religion, and stick to the price current 
and the multiplication table, the only accounts that are not 
"couched in symbolical language." 

Such is the sort of trash that passes for profound philoso- 
phy when once it is made unintelligible, and such are the 
canons of interpretation with which men calling themselves 
philosophers and Christians sit down to investigate the 
claims of the Bible as a revelation from God. If they 
would speak out their true sentiments, they would say, 
" There can not be any revelation from God, because there 
is no God." But they could not call themselves professors 
of Christian colleges, and pastors of Christian churches, and 
reap the emoluments of such situations, if they would hon- 
estly avow their Atheism. Besides, the world would see too 
plainly the drift of their teaching ; therefore it is cloaked 
under a profession of belief in God, the Creator, who how- 



118 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



ever is to be carefully prevented from ever showing himself 
again in the world he has made. 

No proof is attempted for the declaration that miracles 
are impossible. Yet, surely, if it implies a contradiction to 
say so, that contradiction could be shown. That it is not 
self-evident is shown by the general belief of mankind that 
miracles have occurred. No man who believes in a supernat- 
ural being can deny the possibility of supernatural actings. 
The creation of the world is the most stupendous of all mir- 
acles, utterly beyond the power of any finite causes, and 
entirely beyond the reach of our experience, yet some of 
these men admit that this miracle occurred. Supernatural 
events then are not impossible, nor unprecedented. 

The vain notion that God, having created the world at 
first, left it for ever after to the operation of natural 
laws, is conclusively demolished by the discoveries of geol- 
ogy. These discoveries established the' fact recorded in 
Scripture, that in bringing the world into its present form 
there were several distinct and successive interpositions of 
supernatural power, in the distinct and successive creations 
of different species of vegetable and animal life. In former 
periods, they tell us, the earth was so warm that the present 
races of men and animals could not have lived on it, and 
the plants and animals of that age could not live now. 
These very men are profuse in proving that the earth ex- 
isted for ages before man made his appearance upon it. This 
being the case, we are compelled to acknowledge the crea- 
ting power of God above the laws of nature, for there is no 
law of nature whi:h can either create a new species ol 
plants or animals, nor yet change one kind into another, 
make an oak into a larch, or an ox into a sheep, or a goose 
into a turkey, or a megatherium into an elephant, much less 
into a man. Some men have dreamed of such changes as 
these, but no instance of such a change has ever been al- 
leged in proof of the notion. The most distinguished anat- 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 



119 



omists and geologists are fully agreed that no such change 
of one animal into another ever took place ; much less that 
any animal ever was changed into a man. Cuvier, from his 
comprehensive survey of the fossils of former periods, es- 
tablishes the fact, " that the species now living are not mere 
varieties of the species which are lost." And Agassiz says, 
" I have the conviction that species have been created suc- 
cessively, at distinct intervals."* Revelations of God's 
special interpositions in the affairs of this world are thus 
written by his own finger in the fossils and coal, and en- 
graved on the everlasting granite of the earth's foundation 
stones. Dumb beasts and dead reptiles start forward to 
give their irrefutable testimony to the repeated supernatural 
acts of their Creator in this world which he had made. 
Every distinct species of plants and animals is proof of a 
distinct supernatural overruling of the present laws of na- 
ture. The experience of man is not the limit of knowledge. 
His own existence is a proof that the chain of finite causes 
is not inviolable. Geology sweeps away the very foundations 
of skepticism, by demonstrating that certain phenomena 
produced immediately by God himself — the phenomena of 
the creation of life —have occurred repeatedly in the history 
of our globe. Revelation is not impossible because super- 
natural. The world is just as full of supernatural works as 
of natural. Nor is it incredible because it records miracles. 
The miracles recorded in the coal measures are as astonish- 
ing as any recorded in the Bible. 

The Rationalist next assures us, however, that any ex- 
ternal revelation from God to man is useless, because man is 
wise enough without it. The vulgar exposition of this sen- 
timent is familiar to every reader. " You need not begin 
to preach Bible to me. I know my duty well enough with- 
out the Bible." The more educated attempt to reason the 

* See Pearson on Infidelity, page 93, 40th edition ; and Agassiz' s 
Penikese Lectures. 



120 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



matter after this fashion : " Miraculous phenomena will 
never prove the goodness and veracity of Glod, if we do not 
know these qualities in him without a miracle."* "We may 
remark, in passing, that there are some other attributes of 
G-od besides goodness and veracity — holiness and justice for 
instance — which are proved by miracles. " Can thunder 
from the thirty-two azimuths, repeated daily for centuries, 
make God's laws more godlike to me ? Brother, no. Per- 
haps I am grown to be a man now, and do not need the 
thunder and the terror any longer. Perhaps I am above 
being frightened. Perhaps it is not fear but reverence that 
shall now lead me ! Revelation ! Inspirations ! And thy 
own god-created soul, dost thou not call that a revelation ?"f 
It is manifest, however, that if Mr. Carlyle needs not the 
Sinai thunder to assure him that the law given on Sinai was 
from G-od, there were then, and are now, many who do, 
and some of his own sect who doubt in spite of it. If he 
is above the weakness of fearing Grod, all the world is not so. 

The claims of a divine teacher are as unceremoniously re- 
jected as those of a divine revelation. "If it depends on 
Jesus it is not eternally true, and if it is not eternally true 
it is no truth at all," says Parker. As if eternally true, and 
sufficiently known, were just the same thing; or as if be- 
cause vaccination would always have prevented the small- 
pox, the world is under no obligation to Jenner for inform- 
ing us of the fact. In the same tone Emerson despises 
instruction: "It is not instruction but provocation that I 
can receive from another soul. What he announces, I must 
find true in me, or wholly reject; and on his word, or as his 
second, be he who he may, I can accept nothing." Again 
says Parker, " Christianity is dependent on no outside au- 



*:N"ewinan's Phases of Faith, 157. 
fCarlyle's Past and Present, 307. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 



121 



thority. We verify its eternal truth in our soul."* His 
aim is " to separate religion from whatever is finite — Church, 
book, person — and let it rest on its absolute truth."f "It 
bows to no idols, neither the Church, nor the Bible, nor yet 
Jesus, but God only; its Redeemer is within; its salvation 
within; its heaven and its oracle of Grod."J The whole 
strain of this school of writers and their disciples is one of 
depreciation of external revelation, and of exaltation of the 
inner light which every man is supposed to carry within 
him. Religion is "no Morrison's pill from without," but a 
"clearing of the inner light," a "reawakening of our own 
selves from within. "§ So Mr. Newman || abundantly argues 
that an authoritative book revelation of moral and spiritual 
truth is impossible, that God reveals himself within us and 
not without us, and that a revelation of all moral and relig- 
ious truth necessary for us to know is to be obtained by in- 
sight, or gazing into the depths of our own consciousness. 
The sum of the whole, business is, that neither God nor man 
can reveal any religious truth to our minds, or as Parker fe- 
licitously expresses it, "on his word, or as his second, be 
he who he may, I can accept nothing." 

Now, we are tempted to ask, Who are these wonderful 
prodigies, so incapable of receiving instruction from any- 
body? And to our amazement we learn, that some forty 
odd years ago they made their appearance among mankind 
as little squalling babies, without insight enough to know 
their own names, or where they came from, and were actually 
dependent on an external revelation, from their nurses, for 
sense enough to find their mothers' breasts. And as they 
grew a little larger, they obtained the power of speaking 
articulate sounds by external revelation, hearing and imita- 
ting the sounds made by others. Further, upon a memorable 



* Discourse on Religion, p. 209. t Carlyle's Past and Present, p. 
312. Jib. p. 37. I The Soul, p. 342. Jj lb. p. 359. 



122 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



day, they had a "book revelation" made to them, in the 
shape of a penny primer, and were initiated into the mys- 
teries of A, B, C, by "the instructions of another, be he 
who he may." There was absolutely not the least " insight," 
or " spiritual faculty," or " self-consciousness " in one of them, 
by which they then could, or ever to this hour did, '- find 
true within them " any sort of necessary connection between 
the signs, c, a, t — d, o, g — and the sounds cat, dog, or any 
other sounds represented by any other letters of the alpha- 
bet. Faith in the word of their teachers is absolutely the 
sole foundation and only source of their ability to read and 
write. On "the word of another, and as his second, be he 
who he may," every one of them has accepted every intel- 
ligible word he speaks or writes. 

There is living on Martha's Vineyard an old man who has 
never been off the island, and the extent of his knowledge 
is bounded by the confines of his home. He has been told 
of a war between the North and South, but as he had never 
heard the din of battle, nor seen any soldiers, he considered 
it a hoax. He is utterly unable to read, and is ignorant to 
the last degree. A good story is told of his first and only 
day at school. He was quite a lad when a lady came to the 
district, where his father lived, to teach school. He was 
sent, and as the teacher was classifying the school, he was 
called upon in turn and interrogated as to his studies. Of 
course he had to say he had never been to school, and knew 
none of his letters. The schoolmistress gave him a seat on 
one side until she had finished the preliminary examination 
of the rest of the scholars. She then called him to her and 
drew on the blackboard the letter A, and told him what it 
was. and asked him to remember how it looked. He looked 
at it a moment, and then inquired : 

"H-h-how do you know it's A?" 

The teacher replied that when she was a little girl she 
had been to school to an old gentleman, who told her so. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OP THE BIBLE? 



123 



The boy eyed the A for a moment and then asked : 

"H-h-how do you know but he 1-1-lied?" 

The teacher could not get over this obstacle, and the poor 
boy was sent home as incorrigible. 

Mr. Emerson, and the whole school of those who despise 
instruction, had better appoint this man their prophet of the 
inner light, and endow Martha's Vineyard as the Penikese 
of skepticism. 

But the knowledge of letters is not half of their indebt- 
edness to external revelation. For they will not deny that 
a Fiji cannibal has just the same "insight," "spiritual 
faculty," "mighty and transcendent soul," "self-conscious- 
ness," or any other name by which they may dignify our 
common humanity, which they themselves posesss. How 
does it happen, then, that these writers are not assembled 
around the cannibal's oven, smearing their faces with the 
blood, and feasting themselves on the limbs of women and 
children? The inner nature of the cannibal and of the 
Rationalist is the same — whence comes the difference of char- 
acter and conduct? And the inner light, too, is the same; 
for they assure us that " inspiration, like God's omnipres- 
ence, is coextensive with the race." Is it not, after all, 
mere external revelation, in the shape of education — aye, 
moral and religious teaching - that makes the whole differ- 
ence between the civilized American and his inspired Fiji 
brother ? 

These gentlemen not only acknowledge, but try to repay 
their obligations to external revelation. As it is impossible 
for God to give the world a book revelation of moral and 
religious truth, they modestly propose to come to his assist- 
ance, it being quite possible for some men to do what is im- 
possible for God. Accordingly, we have a book revelation 
of moral and religious truth, from one, in his treatise on 
"The Soul," an "external revelation" from another, in his 
"Discourse Concerning Religion," a " Morrison's pill from the 



124 HAVE WE ANT NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 

outside," from a third, in his "Past and Present," and "an- 
nouncements" from a fourth, which assuredly the great mass 
of mankind never "found true within them," else his ora- 
tions and publications had not been needed to convert them. 
It is to be understood, then, that an " external revelation," 
or a "book revelation" of spiritual truth is impossible, only 
when it comes from God, but that these gentlemen have 
proved it quite possible for themselves to deliver one. 

In so doing they have undoubtedly attempted to meet the 
wishes of the greater part of mankind, who have in all lands 
and in all ages longed for some outward revelation from God, 
and testified their desire by running after all sorts of omens, 
auguries, and oracles, consulting witches, and treasuring 
Sibylline leaves, employing writing mediums, and listening 
to spirit-rappers. The "inspiration which is limited to no 
sect, age, or nation — which is wide as the world, and com- 
mon as God,"* has never produced a nation of Rational- 
ists; a fact very unaccountable, if Rationalism be true; 
and one which might well lead these writers to acknowledge 
at least one kind of total depravity, namely, that inspired 
men should love the darkness of external revelations, and 
even of book revelations, and read Bibles, and Korans, and 
Vedas, and "Discourses Concerning Religion," and "Phases 
of Faith," while yet "everything that is of use to man 
lies in the plane of our own consciousness." Surely, such 
a universal craving after an external revelation testifies to a 
felt necessity for it, and renders it probable, or at least de- 
sirable, that God would supply the deficiency. Is the re- 
ligious appetite the only one for which God has provided 
no supply? 

The fact is undeniable, that the grand distinction between 
man and the brutes presents itself right at this point. God 
guides animals by direct revelation — by their instincts ; but 
having given man reason, and free will, he gives him the 



* Parker's Discourses, 171, 33. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



125 



whole field of life for their exercise upon the indirect reve- 
lations he makes to us through the mediation of others. 
For all that we know of history, geography, politics, me- 
chanics, agriculture, poetry, philosophy, or any of the com- 
mon business of life, from the baking of a loaf of bread, or 
the sewing of a shirt, to the following of a funeral, and the 
digging of a grave, we are indebted to education, not to in- 
spiration. All analogy then induces the belief that religion 
also will be taught to mankind by the ministry of human 
teachers, rather than by the direct inspiration of every in- 
dividual. 

But we are instructed, that, "as we have bodily senses to 
lay hold on matter, and supply bodily wants, through which 
we obtain naturally all needed material things, so we have 
spiritual faculties to lay hold on God, and supply spiritual 
wants; through them we obtain all needed spiritual things." 
That we have both bodily senses and spiritual faculties is 
doubtless true ; but whether either the one or the other ob- 
tain all needed things is somewhat doubtful. I can not tell 
how it is with mankind in Boston, for I am not there; and. 
this being a matter in which religious truth is concerned, 
Mr. Emerson will not allow me to receive instruction about 
it from any other soul ; but I see from my window a poor 
widow, with five children, who has bodily senses to lay hold 
on matter, and supply bodily wants ; yet in my opinion she 
has not obtained naturally all needed material things ; and 
if there be a truth which lies emphatically in the plane of 
her own consciousness, it is, that she is in great need of a 
cord of wood, and a barrel of flour, for her starving chil- 
dren. I know, also, a man, to whom God gave bodily senses 
to lay hold on matter, and supply bodily wants, who, by his 
drunkenness, has destroyed these bodily senses, and brought 
his family to utter destitution of all needed material things. 
From one cause or another, I find multitudes here in pov- 
erty and destitution, notwithstanding they have bodily 



126 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



senses. It is reported, also, that there is a poor-house in 
Boston, and poverty in Ireland, and starvation in Madeira, 
and famine in the inundated provinces of France, and mis- 
ery and destitution in London ; which, if true, completely 
overturns this beautiful theory. For, if, notwithstanding 
the possession of bodily senses, men do starve in this world 
for want of needful food and clothing, it is very possible 
that they may have spiritual faculties also, and yet not ob- 
tain through them all needed spiritual things. 

The second part of the theory is as baseless as the first. 
All men have spiritual faculties, and have not obtained by 
them all needed spiritual things. They have not in their 
own opinion, and surely they are competent judges of "what 
lies wholly in the plane of their own consciousness." In 
proof of the fact that mankind have not, in their own opin- 
ion, obtained all needed spiritual things by the use of their 
spiritual faculties, without the aid of external revelation, 
we appeal to all the religions of mankind, Heathen, Moham- 
medan, and Christian. Every one of these appeals to reve- 
lations from Grod. Every lawgiver of note professed to 
have communication with heaven. Zoroaster, Minos, Pythag- 
oras, Solon, Lycurgus, Numa, Mohammed, down to the chief 
of the recent revolution in China. " Whatever becomes of 
the real truth of these relations," says Strabo of those be- 
fore his day, " it is certain that men did believe and think 
them truer If mankind has found the supply of all their 
spiritual wants within themselves, would they have clung in 
this way to the pretense of external revelations ? Is not the 
abundance of quack doctors conclusive proof of the exist- 
ence of disease, and of the need of physicians ? 

Not only was the need of an external revelation of some 
sort acknowledged by all mankind, but the insufficiency of 
the pretended oracles which they enjoyed was deplored by 
the wisest part of them. We never find men amidst the 
dim moonlight of tradition, and the light of nature, vaunt- 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



127 



ing the sufficiency of their inward light ; it is only amidst 
the full blaze of noonday Christianity that philosophers 
can stand up and declare that they have no need of God's 
teaching. Had such men lived in Athens of old, they would 
have found men possessed of spiritual faculties, and those 
of no mean order, engaged in erecting an altar with this in- 
scription, " To the Unknown God." One of the wisest of the 
heathen (Socrates) acknowledged that he could attain to no 
certainty respecting religious truth or moral duty, in these 
memorable words, "We must of necessity wait, till some 
one from him who careth for us, shall come and instruct us 
how we ought to behave toward God and toward man." The 
chief of the Academy, whose philosophy concerning the 
eternity of matter occupies a conspicuous place in the creed 
of American heathens, had no such confidence in the suffi- 
ciency of his own powers of discovering religious truth. 
"We can not know of ourselves what petition will be pleas- 
ing to God, or what worship we should pay to hiin ; but it is 
necessary that a lawgiver should be sent from heaven to in- 
struct .us." " Oh how greatly do I long to see that man ! " 
He further declares that " this lawgiver must be more them 
man, that he may teach us the things man can not know by 
his own nature."* Whether this want of a revelation from 
God was real, or merely imaginary, will appear by a brief 
review of the opinions and practices of those who never en- 
joyed, and of those who reject the light of God's revelation. 

They knew not God. If there is any article of religion 
fundamental, and indispensable to its very existence, it is 
the knowledge of God. It is admitted by Rationalists that 
the spiritual faculties are designed to lay hold on God. It 
has been proved in the previous chapter, and it will be ad- 
mitted by all but Atheists, that God is an Intelligent Being. 
And further it has been proved that God is not everything 



* Plato. Eepublic. Books IV. and VI., and Alcibiades II. 



128 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



and everybody, but distinct from and supreme over all his 
works. Besides, in this country at least, there will not be 
much difference of opinion as to the propriety of a rational 
being adoring a brute, or a log of wood, or a lump of stone. 
It will be allowed that such stupidity shows both ignorance 
and folly. Now let us inquire into the knowledge of Grod 
possessed by the people who have no vision. 

The Chaldeans, the most ancient people of whom we have 
any account, and who had among them the immediate de- 
scendants of Noah, and whatever traditions of Noah's proph- 
ecies they preserved, were probably the best instructed of 
the heathen. Yet we find that they gave up the worship of 
Grod, adored the sun, and moon, and stars of heaven, and in 
process of time degenerated still further, and worshiped 
dumb idols. From this rock we were hewn ; the common 
names of the days of the week, and especially of the first 
day of the week, will forever keep up a testimony to the 
necessity of that revelation which delivered our forefathers 
and us from burning our children upon the devil's altars on 
Sun-days. 

The Egyptians were reputed the most learned of man- 
kind, and Egypt was considered the cradle of the arts and 
sciences. In her existing monuments, hieroglyphic inscrip- 
tions, and tomb paintings, we have presented to us the 
materials for forming a more correct opinion of the religion 
and life of the Egyptians than of any other ancient peo- 
ple ; and the investigation of these monuments is still add- 
ing to our information. Infidel writers and lecturers have 
not hesitated to allege that Moses merely taught the Israel- 
ites the religion of Egypt ; and some have had the hardi- 
hood to allege that the ten commandments are found written 
on the pyramids, as an argument against the necessity of a 
revelation. If the statement were true, it would by no 
means prove the conclusion. Egypt was favored with divine 
revelations to several of her kings, and enjoyed occasional 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 129 

visits from, or the permanent teachings of, such prophets as 
Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, and Moses, for four hundred 
years; a fact quite sufficient to account for her superiority 
to other heathen nations, as well as for the existence of 
some traces of true religion on her monuments. But the 
alleged fact is a falsehood. Some good moral precepts are 
found on the Egyptian monuments, but the ten command- 
ments are not there. It may be charitably supposed that 
those who allege the contrary never learned the ten com- 
mandments, or have forgotten them, else they would have 
remembered that the first commandment is, " Thou shalt 
have no other gods before me;" and that Pharaoh indig- 
nantly asks, " Who is Jehovah that I should obey his 
voice? I know not God :" and that the second is, "Thou 
shalt not make unto thee any graven image," etc., and 
would have paused before alleging that these commands 
were engraved on the very temples of idols, and by the 
priests of the birds, and beasts, and images of creeping 
things which they adored. It is very doubtful if they be- 
lieved in the existence of one supreme God, as most of the 
heathen did; but if they did, "they did not under any 
form, symbol, or hieroglyphic, represent the idea of the 
unity of God," as is fully proved by Wilkinson.* On the 
contrary, the monuments confirm the satirical sketch of the 
poet,f as to the " monsters mad Egypt worshiped ; here a 
sea-fish, there a river-fish ; whole towns adore a dog. This 
place fears an ibis saturated with serpents ; that adores a 
crocodile. It is a sin to violate a leek or onion, or break 
them with a bite." Cruel wars were waged between differ- 
ent towns, as Plutarch tells us, because the people of Cyn- 
opolis would eat a fish held sacred by the citizens of Latop- 

* Manners and Customs of Ancient Egyptians, Second Scries, 
Vol. II. page 176, et passim, 
t Juvenal, Satire XV. 
9 



130 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 



olis. Bulls, and dogs, and cats, and rats, and reptiles, and 
dung beetles, were devoutly adored by the learned Egyp- 
tians. A Homan soldier, who had accidentally killed one 
of their gods, a cat, was put to death for sacrilege.* When- 
ever a dog died, every person in the house went into mourn- 
ing, and fasted till night. So low had the "great, the 
mighty and transcendent soul," been degraded that there is 
a picture extant of one of the kings of Egypt worshiping 
his own coffin ! Such is man's knowledge of God without a 
revelation from him. 

The Greeks, from their early intercourse with Egypt, 
borrowed from them most of their religion; but by later 
connections with the Hebrews, about the time of Aristotle 
and Alexander, they gathered a few grains of truth to throw 
into the heap of error. After the translation of the Scrip- 
tures into Greek, in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, any 
of their philosophers who desired might easily have learned 
the knowledge of the true God. But before this period we 
find little or no sense or truth in their religion. And the 
same remarks will apply to the Romans. Their gods were 
as detestable as they were numerous. Hesiocl tells us they 
had thirty thousand. Temples were erected to all the 
passions, fears, and diseases to which humanity is subject. 
Their supreme god, Jupiter, was an adulterer, Mars a mur- 
derer, Mercury a thief, Bacchus a drunkard, Venus a harlot; 
and they attributed other crimes to their gods too horrible 
to be mentioned. Such gods were worshiped, with appro- 
priate ceremonies, of lust, drunkenness, and bloodshed. 
Their most sacred mysteries, carried on under the patron- 
age of these licentious deities, were so abominable and in- 
famous, that it was found necessary, for the preservation of 
any remnant of good order, to prohibit them 

It may be supposed that the human race is grown wiser 



* Diodorus Siculus, Book I. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 



131 



now than in the days of Socrates and Cicero, and that such 
abominations are no longer possible. Turn your eyes, then, 
to India, and behold one hundred and fifty millions of 
rational beings, possessed of "spiritual faculties," "insight," 
and "the religious sentiment," worshiping three hundred 
and thirty millions of gods, in the forms of hills, and trees, 
and rivers, and rocks, elephants, tigers, monkeys, and rats, 
crocodiles, serpents, beetles, and ants, and monsters like to 
nothing in heaven or earth, or under the earth. Take one 
specimen of all. There is "the lord of the world," Jugger- 
nath. "When you think of the monster block of the idol, 
with its frightfully grim and distorted visage, so justly styled 
the Moloch of the East, sitting enthroned amid thousands 
of massive sculptures, the representative emblems of that 
cruelty and vice which constitute the very essence of his 
worship ; when you think of the countless multitudes that 
annually congregate there, from all parts of India, many of 
them measuring the whole distance of their weary pilgrim- 
age with their own bodies ; when you think of the merit- 
earning assiduities constantly practiced by crowds of devo- 
tees and religious mendicants, around the holy city, some 
remaining all day with their head on the ground, and their 
feet in the air; others with their bodies entirely covered 
with earth ; some cramming their eyes with mud, and their 
moutli3 with straw, while others lie extended in a puddle of 
water; here one man lying with his foot tied to his neck, 
another with a pot of fire on his breast, a third enveloped 
in a network of ropes; when, besides these self-inflicted tor- 
ments, you think of the frightful amount of involuntary 
suffering and wretchedness arising from the exhaustion of 
toilsome pilgrimages, the cravings of famine, and the scourg- 
ings of pestilence ; when you think of the day of the high 
festival— how the horrid king is dragged forth from his tem- 
ple, and mounted on his lofty car, in the presence of hun- 
dreds of thousands, that cause the very earth to shake with 



132 HATE WE ANT NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 

shouts of •' Victory to Juggernath. our Lord;' how the offi- 
ciating high priest, stationed in front of the elevated idol, 
commences the public service by a loathsome pantomimic 
exhibition, accompanied with the utterance of filthy, blas- 
phemous songs, to which the vast multitude at intervals re- 
spond, not in the strains of tuneful melody, but in loud yells 
of approbation, united with a kind of hissing applause; 
when you think of the carnage that ensues, in the name of 
sacred offering — how, as the ponderous machine rolls on, 
grating harsh thunder, one and another of the more enthu- 
siastic devotees throw themselves beneath the wheels, and 
are instantly crushed to pieces, the infatuated victims of 
hellish superstition ; when you think of the numerous Gol- 
gothas that bestud the neighboring plain, where the dogs, 
jackals and vultures seem to live on human prey; and of 
those bleak and barren sands that are forever whitened with 
the skulls and bones of deluded pilgrims which lie bleach- 
ing in the sun, ?J * you will be able to see an awful force of 
meaning in the words of our text, and to realize more fully 
the necessity of a revelation from God, for the preser- 
vation of animal life to man. Literally, where there is no 
vision the people perish. Man doth not live by bread only, 
but by every word which proceedeth from the mouth of 
God. 

Take one other illustration of ignorance of God in the 
minds of those who close their eyes against the light of rev- 
elation — the heathen of Europe and America, possessing 
that inspiration which is wide as the world, looking abroad 
upon all the glorious works of the great Creator, and de- 
claring there is no God. On the other hand, we have men, 
possessed of this same inspiration, deifying everything, and 
outrunning even the Hindoos in the multitude of their di- 
vinities, declaring that every stick, and stone, and serpent, 



* Duffs India, page 222. 



HAVE WE ANT NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



133 



and snail that crawls on the earth is God, and making pro- 
fessions of holding spiritual communings with them all. To 
crown the monument of folly, the chief of the Positive 
Philosophy conies forth with a revelation from his spiritual 
faculties, in which by way of improving on the proverb 
"both are best," and of being sure of the truth, he unites 
Atheism, and Pantheism, and Idolatry — teaches his child to 
worship idols, the youth to believe in one God, and himself 
and other full-grown men to adore the "resultant of all the 
forces capable of voluntarily contributing to the perfection- 
ing of the universe, not forgetting his worthy friends, the 
animals." To such darkness are men justly condemned 
who shut their eyes against the light of God's revelation. 
Where there is no vision the people perish intellectually. 
He who turns away his ears from the truth must be turned 
unto fables. " Hear ye and give ear, be not proud, for the 
Lord hath spoken. Give glory to the Lord your God be- 
fore he cause darkness, and before your feet stumble upon 
the dark mountains, and while ye look for light, he turn it 
into the shadow of death, and make it gross darkness." 

Without a revelation from God the mind of man can at- 
tain to no certainty regarding the most important of all his 
interests, the destiny of his immortal soul. He knows well — 
for every sickness, and sorrow, and calamity declares it, and 
quick returning troubles will not allow him to forget — that 
the Ruler of the world is offended with him; and conscience 
tells him why. The sense of guilt is common to the human 
race. This is, indeed, "the inspiration which knows no 
sect, no country, no religion, no age; which is as wide as 
humanity." Reason asks herself, Will God be always thus 
angry with me? Shall I always feel these pangs oP remorse 
for my sins? Will misery follow me forever, as I see and 
feel that it does here? Or shall my soul exist under God's 
frowns, or perish under his just sentence, even as my body 
perishes? Does the grave hide forever all that I loved? 



134 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



Have they ceased to be? Shall we ever meet again? 
Or must I say, "Farewell, farewell! An eternal farewell !" 
And in a few clays myself also cease to be? The only 
answer Reason gives is-— solemn silence. 

The wisest of men could not tell. Who has not dropped 
a tear over the dying words of Socrates. "I am going out of 
the world, and you are to continue in it, but which of us 
has the better part is a secret to every one but G-ocl." Cicero 
contended for the immortality of the soul against the multi- 
tudes of philosophers who denied it in his day ; yet, after 
recounting their various opinions, he is obliged to say, 
" Which of these is true, (rod alone knows : and which is 
most probable, a very great question."* And Seneca, on a 
review of this subject, says: " Immortality, however desir- 
able, was rather promised than proved by these great nien/'f 

The multitude had but two ideas on the subject. Either 
their ghosts would wander eternally in the land of shadows, 
or else they would pass into a succession of other bodies, of 
animals or men. From the nakedness and desolation of un- 
clothed spirit, and the possibility which this notion held 
out of some close contact with a holy and just judge, the 
soul shrank back to the hope of the metempsychoois, and 
hoped rather to dwell in the body of a brute, than be utterly 
unclothed and mingle with spirits. This is the delusion 
cherished by the people of India and many other lands to 
this day. How unsatisfactory to the dying sinnei this un- 
certainty. " Tell me," said a wealthy Hindoo, who had given 
all his wealth to the Brahmins who surrounded his dying 
bed, that they might obtain pardon for his sins, " Tell me 
what will become of my soul when I die?" "Your soul 
will go into the body of a holy cow." "And after that?" 
"It will pass into the body of the divine peacock." "And 

* Tusc. Quaest. lib. 1. 
t Seneca, Ep. 102. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 135 

after that? " " It will pass into a flower." " Tell me, oh ! 
tell me," cried the dying man, "where will it go last of all?" 
Where will it go last of all? Aye, that is the question 
Reason can not answer. 

The rejectors of the Bible here are as uncertain on this all- 
important subject as the heathen of India. They have every 
variety of oracles, and conjectures, and suppositions about the 
f other world; but for their guesses they offer no proof. 
When they give us their oracles as if they were known 
truths, we are compelled to ask, How do you know? The 
only thing in which they are agreed among themselves is 
in denying the resurrection of the body; a point which 
they gathered from their heathen classics. A poor, empty, 
naked, shivering, table-rapping spirit, obliged to fly over the 
world at the sigh of any silly sewing girl, or the bidding of 
some brazen-faced strumpet, is all that ever shall exist of 
Washington, or Newton, in the scheme of one class of Bible 
rejectors. To obtain rest from such a doom, others fly to 
the eternal tomb, and inform us that the soul is simply an 
acting of the brain, and when the brain ceases to act, the 
soul ceases also. Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we 
die. But even this hog philosophy is reasonable, compared 
with the dogma of the large majority, that a man may blas- 
pheme, swear, lie, steal, murder, and commit adultery, and 
go straight to heaven— that "many a swarthy Indian who 
bowed down to wood and stone — many a grim-faced Cal- 
muck who worshiped the great god of storms — many a 
Grecian peasant who did homage to Phoebus Apollo when 
the sun rose or went down — many a savage, his hands 
smeared all over with human sacrifice — shall sit down with 
Moses and Jesus in the kingdom of (rod."* To such wild 
unreason does the mind of man descend when it rejects the 
Bible. 

Life and immortality arc brought to light by the gospel. 



* Parker's Discourse, 83. 



136 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



Where there is no vision, hope perishes. The only plausible 
creed for him who rejects it is the eternal tomb, and the 
heart-chilling inscription: "Death is an eternal sleep!" 

Without a revelation from God, men are as ignorant how 
to live, as how to die. They have no rule of life having 
either truth or authority to direct them. Our Anglo-Saxon 
ancestors, of the purity of whose blood we are so proud, 
trusted to their magical incantations for the cure of dis- 
eases, for the success of their tillage, for the discovery of 
lost property, for un charming cattle and the prevention of 
casualties. One day was useful for all things; another, 
though good to tame animals, was baleful to sow seed. One 
day was favorable to the commencement of business, an- 
other to let blood, and others wore a forbidding aspect to 
these and other things. On this day they were to buy, on 
a second to sell, on a third to hunt, on a fourth to do noth- 
ing. If a child was born on such a day, it would live ; if 
on another, its life would be sickly ; if on another, it would 
perish early.* Their descendants who reject the Bible are 
fully as superstitious. Astrologers, and Mediums, and 
Clairvoyants, in multitudes, find a profitable trade among 
them ; and one prominent anti-Bible lecturer will cure you 
of any disease you have, if you will only inclose, in a letter, 
a lock of hair from the right temple, and — a — five dollar 
bill. 

The precepts of even the wisest men, and the laws of the 
best regulated States, commanded or approved of vice. In 
Babylon prostitution was compulsory on every female. The 
Carthaginian law required human sacrifices. When Aga- 
thoclas besieged Carthage, two hundred children, of the 
most noble families, were murdered by the command of the 
senate, and three hundred citizens voluntarily sacrificed 
themselves to Saturn. f The laws of Sparta required 

* Turner's Anglo-Saxons, h. vii. chap. 13. 
t Diodorus Siculus, b. xx. chap. 14. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OP THE BIBLE? 



137 



theft, and the murder of unhealthy children. Those of 
ancient Rome allowed parents the power of killing their 
children, if they pleased. At Athens, the capital of heathen 
literature and philosophy, it was enacted " that infants which 
appeared to be maimed should either be killed or exposed."* 

Plato, dissatisfied with the constitution, made a scheme 
of one much better, which he has left us in his Republic. 
In this great advance of society, this heathen millennium, 
we find that there was to be a community of women and of 
property, just as among our modern heathens. Women's 
rights were to be maintained by having the women trained 
to war. Children were still to be murdered, if convenience 
called for it. And the young children were to be led to 
battle at a safe distance, "that the young whelps might early 
scent carnage, and be inured to slaughter." 

The teachings of all these philosophers were immoral. 
He may lie, says Plato, who knows how to do it. Pride 
and the love of popular applause were esteemed the best 
motives to virtue. Profane swearing was commanded by 
the example of all their best writers and moralists. Oaths 
are frequent in the writings of Plato and Seneca. The 
gratification of the sensual appetites was openly taught. 
Aristippus taught that a wise man might steal and commit 
adultery when he could. Unnatural crimes were vindicated. 
The last dread crime — suicide — was pleaded for by Cicero 
and Seneca as the mark of a hero ; and Demosthenes, Cato, 
Brutus, and Cassius, carried the means of self-destruction 
about them, that they might not fall alive into the hands of 
their enemies. 

The daily lives of these wisest of the heathen corresponded 
to their teachings, so far at least as vice was concerned. The 
most notorious vices, and even unnatural crimes, were prac- 
ticed by them. The reader of the classics does not need to 



* Aristotle, Polit. lib. vii. chap. 17. 



138 HAVE WE ANT NEED OF THE BIBLE? 

be reminded that such vices are lauded in the poems of 
Ovid, and Horace, and Virgil ; that the poets were rewarded 
and honored for songs which would not be tolerated for a 
moment in the vilest theater of New York. 

Recently some daily papers and broad-church preachers 
have taken to the canonization of heathen saints ; they de- 
nounce vigorously the bigotry of any who will not open to 
them the gates of heaven, or who will, in general, deny sal- 
vation to good heathens. But we do not deny salvation to 
good heathens, or to good Jews, or to good Mohammedans, 
or to anybody who is good. God is no respecter of persons j 
but in every nation, he that feareth God and worketh right- 
eousness is accepted of him. Nor are we about to usurp 
Peter's keys, and lock anybody out of heaven, or into it 
either ; we are only acting as jurymen upon the life and con- 
duct of men held up to our children as noble examples of a 
good life, in their classics, by heathens like themselves, and 
recommended now by Christian clergymen, as fitter for the 
kingdom of God, than bad Christians ; which last may be 
very true, and so much the worse for the bad Christians. 
But the question is not to be thus decided by comparisons, 
or by generalities ; we must have specified individual hea- 
then saints. When, however, we come to look for them, these 
saints and heroes prove to be only fit for the penitentiary, 
according to the laws of any of our States ; and were they 
living now, and behaving themselves according to their ac- 
customed habits, the best of them would be fortunate if 
they got there before they were iarred and feathered 
by an outraged public. Socrates, Seneca, and the Emperor 
Marcus Aurelius, form the stock specimens trotted out of 
the stables of heathen morality, for the admiration and 
reverence of Christians in this nineteenth century. But it 
has been well remarked of Socrates, that no American lady 
would live with him a year without applying for a divorce, 
and getting it, too, upon very sufficient grounds. Seneca, 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 139 

who wrote so beautifully upon morals, was an adulterer ; 
and, moreover, prostituted his pen to write a defense of a 
man who murdered his mother. And Marcus Aurelius di- 
rected the murder of thousands of innocent men and women, 
causing young ladies to be stripped naked and torn to pieces 
by wild beasts, in the public amphitheater, and others to be 
roasted alive in red-hot iron chairs, for no other offense 
but that they avowed themselves Christians. Such are these 
boasted saints and heroes of heathendom. 

What, then, must the lives of the vulgar have been? In 
the very height of Roman civilization, Trajan caused ten 
thousand men to hew each other to pieces for the amuse- 
ment of the Roman people ; and noble ladies feasted their 
eyes on the spectacle. In the Augustan age, when the in- 
vincible armies of Rome gave law to half the world, fathers 
were in the habit of mutilating their sons rather than see 
them subjected to the slavery and terrible despotism of 
their officers. What, then, must the state of the people of 
the vanquished countries have been? Whole provinces 
were frequently given over to fire and sword by generals 
not reputed inhuman; and such was the progress of war 
and anarchy, and their never-failing accompaniments, fam- 
ine and pestilence, that, in the reign of Gallienus, large 
cities were left utterly desolate, the public roads became un- 
safe from immense packs of wolves, and it was computed 
that one-half of the human race perished. This was just 
before the toleration of Christianity. God would allow the 
wisest and bravest of mankind to try the experiment of neg- 
lecting his gospel and living without his revelation, until all 
mankind might be convinced that such a course is suicidal 
to nations. "Where there is no vision, the people perish." 

A brief reference to the codes of morals which the mod- 
ern opposers of the Bible would substitute for it in Chris- 
tian lands shall conclude our proof of the necessity of such 



140 HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 

a revelation of God's law to man, as shall guide his life to 
peace and happiness. 

The family is the basis of the commonwealth. Destroy 
family confidence and family government, and you destroy 
society, subvert civil government, and bring destruction on 
the human race. Mankind are so generally agreed on this 
subject, that adultery, even among heathens, is regarded 
and punished as a crime. The whole school of Infidel writ- 
ers and anti-Bible lecturers, male and female, apologize for, 
and vindicate this crime. Lord Herbert, the first of the 
English Deists, taught that the indulgence of lust and anger 
is no more to be blamed than the thirst occasioned by the 
dropsy, or the drowsiness produced by lethargy. Mr. Hobbes 
asserted that every man has a right to all things, and 
may lawfully get them if he can. Bolingbroke taught that 
man is merely a superior animal, which is just the modern 
development theory, and that his chief end is to gratify the 
appetites and inclinations of the flesh. Hume, whose argu- 
ment against miracles is so frequently in the mouths of 
American Infidels, taught that adultery must be practiced, 
if men would obtain all the advantages of life, and that if 
practiced frequently, it would by degrees come to be thought 
no crime at all — a prediction as true as Holy Writ; the ful- 
fillment of which hundreds of the citizens of Cincinnati can 
attest, who have heard a lecturer publicly denounce the 
Bible as an immoral book, and in the same address declare 
that if a woman was married to a man, in her opinion of in- 
ferior development, it was her duty to leave him and live 
with another. This duty is by no means neglected, as the 
numerous divorces, spiritual marriages, separations, and 
elopements among this class of persons, testify. Voltaire 
held that it was not agreeable to policy to regard it as a vice 
in a moral sense. Rousseau, a liar, a thief, and a debauched 
profligate, according to his own printed "Confessions," held 
the same high opinion of the inner light as our American 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



141 



Spiritualists. 11 1 have only to consult myself" said he, 11 con- 
cerning what I do. All that I feel to be right, is right."* 

In fact, the purport of this inner light doctrine is ex- 
actly as Rousseau expressed it, and amounts simply to this, 
Do what you like. 

On this lawless principle these men acted. Take, for ex- 
ample, the chief saint on the calendar of American Infidel- 
ity, whose birthday is annually celebrated by a festival in 
this city, and in whose honor hundreds of men, who would 
like to be reputed decent citizens, parade the streets of Cin- 
cinnati in solemn procession — Thomas Paine — the author of 
"The Age of Reason," as his character is depicted by one 
who was his helper in the work of blaspheming Grod and se- 
ducing men, and whose testimony, therefore, in the eyes of 
an Infidel, is unimpeachable — William Carver. 

" Mr. Thomas Paine : I received your letter, dated the 25th 
ult.j in answer to mine, dated November 21, and after minutely ex- 
amining its contents, I found that you had taken to the pitiful sub- 
terfuge of lying for your defense. You say that you paid me four 
dollars per week for your board and lodging, during the time you 
were with me, prior to the first of June last ; which was the day 
that I went up, by your order, to bring you to York, from New 
Bochelle. It is fortunate for me that I have a living evidence that 
saw you give me five guineas, and no more, in my shop, at your 
departure at that time ; but you said you would have given me 
more, but that you had no more with you at present. You say, 
also, that you found your own liquors during the time you boarded 
with me ; but you should have said, ' I found only a small part of 
the liquor I drank during my stay with you ; this part I purchased 
of John Fellows, which was a demi-john of brandy, containing 
four gallons,' and this did not serve you three weeks. This can be 
proved, and I mean not to say anything I can not prove, for I hold 
truth as a precious jewel. It is a well-known fact that you drank 
one quart of brandy per day, at my expense, during the different 
times you boarded with me ; the demi-john above mentioned ex- 
cepted, and the last fourteen weeks you were sick. Is not this a 



* Home's Introduction of the Scriptures, Vol. I. page 25. 



142 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 



supply of liquor for dinner and supper." * * * * "I have often 
wondered that a French woman and three children should leave 
France and all their connections, to follow Thomas Paine to Amer- 
ica. Suppose I were to go to my native country, England, and 
take another man's wife and three children of his, and leave my 
wife and children in this country, what would be the natural 
conclusion in the minds of the people, but that there was some 
criminal connection between the woman and myself?"* 
The death of this man was horrible. 

The Philadelphia Presbyterian says: "There is now in 
Philadelphia a lady who saw Paine on his dying-bed. She 
informs us that Paine 's physician also attended her father's 
family in the city of New York, where in her youth she re- 
sided, and that on one occasion whilst at their house, he pro- 
posed to her to accompany him to the Infidel's dwelling, 
which she did. It was a miserable hovel in what was then 
Raisin Street. She had often seen Paine before, a drunken 
profligate, wandering about the streets, from whom the 
children always fled in terror. On entering his room she 
found him stretched on his miserable bed. His visage was 
lean and haggard, and wore the expression of great agony. 
He expressed himself without reserve as to his fears of 
death, and repeatedly called on the name of Jesus, begging 
for mercy. The scene was appalling, and so deeply engraven 
on her mind, that nothing could obliterate it." — Philadelphia 
Presbyterian, March 17, 1857. 

The physician's statement has been common, many years, 
and corresponds with the above. So do Grant Thorburn's 
representations agree with both. And the piece published 
by Rev. Jas. Inglis in his "Waymarks in the Wilderness," 
which has proved so distasteful to the Paineites here, sub- 
stantially agrees with all the others. It is only the truth- 
fulness of it which is so offensive. It may be of interest to 

* Printed repeatedly in New York newspapers, and given entire 
in the report of the discussion between Dr. Berg and Mr. Barker. 
"W. S.Young, Philadelphia, 1854. 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE? 



143 



state, that the facts therein named are the recollections of 
old Dr. McClay, a Baptist minister of known power and ver- 
acity. The fact of Paine's miserable, and cowardly, and 
man-forsaken end is too true. Let no one be foolhardy 
enough to follow them, rejecting to do it, a fourfold cord of 
strong testimony ; nay, we may add, a stronger cord of five- 
fold testimony, as Paine's nurse testifies like the rest. 

In the East these facts are so notorious that even Infidels 
disown allegiance or attachment to Paine, if they wish to be 
considered respectable. Some of the severest denuncia- 
tions against him, which we ever heard, have been from In- 
fidels. Indeed this is more than plain from the very fact 
of all the Infidels having forsaken Paine on his death-bed. 
Who was his doctor? A Christian. Who was his nurse? 
A Christian? Who were his most constant visitors and 
sympathizers? Thorburn, McClay, etc., Christians. They 
went, for mercy's sake; Infidels, having no "bowels of mer- 
cies," kept away. Carver, Jefferson, etc., were far from him 
in his extreme hour. 

The testimony of Mons. Tronchin, a Protestant physician 
from Geneva, who attended Voltaire on his death-bed, was: 
That to see all the furies of Orestes, one only had to be 
present at the death of Voltaire. ("Pour voir toutes les 
furies a" Oreste, il tiy avait qua se trouver a la mort de 
Voltaire.") "Such a spectacle," he adds, "would benefit 
the young, who are in danger of losing the precious helps 
of religion." The Marechal de Richelieu, too, was so ter- 
rified at what he saw that he left the bedside of Voltaire, 
declaring that "the sight was too horrible for endurance."* 

And these are the saints, and apostles, and heroes of In- 
fidelity, to whose memories Infidels make orations and festi- 
vals, and whose writings are reprinted in scores of editions, 

* The Occident, 20th August, 1874, San Francisco. 



144 HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE $ 

not only over Christendom, but even in India, to teach man- 
kind how to live and how to die ! 

Such are the lives and deaths of those who denounce the 
Bible as an immoral Book, and blaspheme the Grod of the 
Bible as too unholy to be reverenced or adored! "But, 
beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before 
of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they 
told you there should be mockers in the last time, who 
should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they 
who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit." 
In the Free Love Institute about to be established in our 
vicinity, we shall have the full development of these filthy 
principles and practices. 

Let fathers and husbands look to this matter. Especially 
let ungodly men set to work and devise some law of man 
capable of binding those who renounce the law of Grod, and 
with it all human authority. For there can be no law of 
man, unless there is a revealed law of Grod. " What right," 
says the Pantheist, the Fourierist, the Spiritualist, the Athe- 
ist, "what right have you to command me? Right and 
wrong are only matters of feeling, and your feelings are no 
rule to me. The will of the majority is only the law of 
might, and if I can evade it, or overcome it, my will is as 
good as theirs. Oaths are only an idle superstition ; there 
is no judge, no judgment, no punishment for the false 
swearer." Take away the moral sanction of law, and the 
sacredness of oaths, and what basis have you left for any 
government, save the point of the bayonet? Take away the 
revealed law of Grod, and you leave not a vestige of any au- 
thority to any human law. " We hold these truths to be 
self-evident," said the immortal framers of the basis of the 
American Confederation, "that all men are created equal; 
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalien- 
able rights." It was well said. The rights of Grod are the 
only basis of the rights of man. One of the most sagacious 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF TIIE BIBLE? 



145 



of modern statesmen has borne his testimony to this funda- 
mental truth — that religion is the only basis of social order 
— in words as trenchant as the guillotine which suggested 
them. "It is not," says Napoleon, "the mystery of incar- 
nation which I perceive in religion, but the mystery of social 
order. It attaches to heaven an idea of equality which pre- 
vents the rich from being massacred by the poor."* 

Once in modern times, the rejectors of the Bible had op- 
portunity to try the experiment of ruling a people on a large 
scale, and giving the world a specimen of an Infidel Repub- 
lic. You have heard one of them here express his admira- 
tion of that government, and declare his intention to 
present a public vindication of it. Of course, as soon as 
practicable, that which they admire they will imitate, and 
the scenes of Paris and Lyons will be re-enacted in Louis- 
ville and Cincinnati. Our Bibles will be collected and 
burned on a dung-heap. Death will be declared an eternal 
sleep. G-od will be declared a fiction. Religious worship 
will be renounced ; the Sabbath abolished ; and a prostitute, 
crowned with garlands, will receive the adorations of the 
mayors and councilmen of Cincinnati and Newport. The 
reign of terror will commence. The guillotine shall take 
its place on the Fifth Street Market place. Proscription 
will follow proscription. Women will denounce their hus- 
bands, and children their parents, as bad citizens, and lead 
them to the ax ; and well-dressed ladies, filled with savage 
ferocity, will seize the mangled bodies of their murdered 
countrymen between their teeth. The Licking will be 
, choke 1 with the bodies of men, and the Ohio dyed with 
their blood; and those whose infancy has sheltered them 
from the fire of the rabble soldiery will be bayoneted as 
they cling to the knees of their destroyers. f The common 

* Ardeches' Life of Napoleon I. 222. 

t Home's Introduction to the Scriptures, Vol. I. page 26, where 
ample references to cotemporary French writers are given. 
10 



146 



HAVE WE ANY NEED OF THE BIBLE ? 



doom of man commuted for the violence of the sword, the 
bayonet, the sucking boat, and the guillotine, the knell of 
the nation tolled, and the world summoned to its execution 
and funeral, will need no preacher to expound the text, 
Where there is no vision, the people perish. 



CHAPTER V. 



yjHO ^ROTE J'hE J^EW ^ESTAMENT? 



"The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the 
token in every epistle : so I write. The grace of our Lord Jesus 
Christ be with you all. Amen." — 2 Thess. iii. 17. 



Religion rests not on dogmas, but on a number of great 
facts. In a previous chapter we found one of these to be, 
that people destitute of a revelation of God's will ever 
have been, and now are, ignorant, miserable, and wicked. If 
it were at all needful, we might go on to show that there 
are people in the world, who have decent clothing and com- 
fortable houses, who work well-tilled farms and sub-soil 
plows, and reaping machinery, who yoke powerful streams 
to the mill wheel, and harness the iron horse to the market 
wagon, who career their floating palaces up the opposing 
floods, line their coasts with flocks of white-winged schoon- 
ers, and show their flags on every coast of earth, who invent 
and make everything that man will buy, from the brass but- 
ton, dear to the barbarian, to the folio of the philosopher, 
erect churches in all their towns, and schools in every vil- 
lage, who make their blacksmiths more learned than the 
priests of Egypt, their Sabbath scholars wiser than the phi- 
losophers of Greece, and even the criminals in their jails 
more decent characters than the sages, heroes, and gods of 
the lands without the Bible ; and that these people are the 

people who possess a Book, which they think contains a 

(147) 



148 WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 

revelation from G-od, teaching them how to live well ; which 
Book they call the Bible. This is the book about which 
we make our present inquiry. Who wrote it? 

The fact being utterly undeniable, that these blessings 
are found among the people who possess the Bible, and only 
among them, we at once, and summarily, dismiss the arro- 
gant falsehood presented to prevent any inquiry about the 
Book, namely, that " Christianity is just like any other su- 
perstition, and its sacred books like the impositions of Chi- 
nese, Indian, or Mohammedan impostors. They, too, are 
religious, and have their sacred books, which they believe 
to be divine." A profound generalization indeed! Is a 
peach-tree just like a horse-chestnut, or a scrub-oak, or a 
honey-locust ? They are all trees, and have leaves on them. 
The Bible is just as like the Yi King, or the Yedas, or the 
Koran, as a Christian American is like a Chinaman, a Turk, 
or a Hindoo. But it is too absurd to begin any discussion 
with these learned Thebans of the relative merits of the 
Bible as compared with the Yedas, and the Chinese Clas- 
sics, of which they have never read a single page. Let them 
stick to what they pretend to know. 

The Bible is a great fact in the world's history, known 
alike to the prince and the peasant, the simple and the sage. 
It is perused with pleasure by the child, and pondered with 
patience by the philosopher. Its psalms are caroled on the 
school green, cheer the chamber of sickness, and are chanted 
by the mother over her cradle, by the orphan over the 
tomb. Here, thousands of miles away from the land of its 
birth, in a world undiscovered for centuries after it was fin- 
ished, in a language unknown alike at Athens and Jerusa- 
lem, it rules as lovingly and as powerfully as in its native 
soil. To show that its power is not derived from race or 
clime, it converts the Sandwich Islands into a civilized na- 
tion, and transforms the Xew Zealand cannibal into a British 
shipowner, the Indian warrior into an American editor, and 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 149 



the Negro slave into the President of a free African Re- 
public. It has inspired the Caffirs of Africa to build tele- 
graphs, and to print associated press dispatches in their 
newspapers ; while the Zulus, one of whom would have con- 
verted Bishop Colenso from Christianity, if he had been a 
Christian, are importing steel plows by hundreds every ; 
year. It has captured the enemy's fortresses, and turned 
his guns. Lord Chesterfield's parlor, where an infidel club 
met to sneer at religion, is now a vestry, where the prayers 
of the penitent are offered to Christ. Gibbon's house, at 
Lake Lemon, is now a hotel; one room of which is devoted 
to the sale of Bibles. Voltaire's printing press, from which 
he issued his infidel tracts, has been appropriated to print- 
ing the Word of God.* It does not look as if it had fin- 
ished its course and ceased from its triumphs. Translated 
into the hundred and fifty languages spoken by nine hun- 
dred millions of men, carried by ten thousand heralds to 
every corner of the globe, sustained by the cheerful contribu- 
tions and fervent prayers of hundreds of thousands of ar- 
dent disciples, it is still going forth conquering and to con- 
quer. Is there any other book so generally read, so greatly 
loved, so zealously propagated, so widely diffused, so uniform 
in its results, and so powerful and blessed in its influences? 
Do you know any? If you can not name any book, no, nor 
any thousand books, which in these respects equal the Bible 
— then it stands out clear and distinct, and separate from 
all other authorship ; and with an increased emphasis comes 
our question, Who wrote it? 

With all these palpable facts in view, to come to the ex- 
amination of this question as if we knew nothing about 
them, or as if knowing them well, we cared nothing at all 
about them, and were determined to deny them their natu- 

* The Family Christian Almanac for 1859, p. 57, American Tract 
Society, New York. 



150 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 



ral influence in begetting within us a very strong presump- 
tion in favor of its divine origin, were to declare that our 
heads and hearts were alike closed against light and love. 
But to enter on this inquiry into the origin of the Book 
which has produced such results, with a preconceived opin- 
ion that it must be a forgery, and an imposition, the fruit of 
a depraved heart, and a lying tongue, implies so much home- 
born deceit that, till the heart capable of such a prejudice 
be completely changed, no reasoning can have any solid ful- 
crum of truth or goodness to rest on. It is sheer folly to 
talk of one's being wholly unprejudiced in such an inquiry. 
No man ever was, or could be so. As his sympathies are 
toward goodness and virtue, and the happiness of mankind, 
or toward pride and deceit, and selfishness and savageness, 
so will his prejudices be for or against the Bible. 

On looking at the Bible, we find it composed of a num- 
ber of separate treatises, written by different writers, at 
various times ; some parts fifteen hundred years before the 
others. We find, also, that it treats of the very beginning 
of the world, before man was made, and of other matters of 
which we have no other authentic history to compare with 
it. Again, we find portions which treat of events connected 
in a thousand places with the affairs of the Boman Empire, 
of which we have several credible histories. Now, there are 
two modes of investigation open to us, the dogmatic and the 
inductive. We may take either. We may construct for 
ourselves, from the most flimsy suppositions, a metaphysical 
balloon, inflated with self-conceit into the rotundity of a 
cosmogony, according to which, in our opinion, the world 
should have been made, and we may paint it over with the 
figures of the various animals and noble savages which 
ought to have sprung up out of its fornea, and we may 
stripe its history to suit our notions of the progress of such 
a world, and soaring high into the clouds, after a little pre- 
liminary amusement in the discovery of eternal red-hot fire- 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 151 

mists, and condensing comets, and so forth, we may come 
down upon the summit of some of this earth's mountains, 
say Ararat, and take a survey of the Bible process of world- 
making. Finding that the Creator of the world had to 
make his materials — a business in which no other world- 
maker ever did engage — and, further, that God's plan of 
making it by no means corresponds to our patent process, 
and that the article is not at all like what we intend to pro- 
duce when we go into the business, and that it does not 
work according to our expectations, we can denounce the 
whole as a very mean affair, and the Book which describes 
it as not worth reading. If one wants some new subject 
for merriment, and does not mind making a fool of himself, 
and is not to be terrified by old-fashioned notions about God 
Almighty, and is perfectly confident that God can tell him 
nothing that he does not know better already, and merely 
wants to see whether he is not trying to pass off old fables 
upon wide-awake people for facts — this dogmatic plan will 
suit him. 

On the other hand, if one is tolerably convinced that he 
does not know everything, not much of the world he lives in, 
less of its history, and nothing at all about the best way of 
making it, and that when it needs mending it will not be 
sent to his workshop ; that he knows nothing about what 
happened before he was born unless what other people tell 
him, and that, though men do err, yet all men are not liars, 
that all the blessings of education, civilization, law and lib- 
erty, from the penny primer to the Constitution of the 
United States, came to him solely through the channel of 
abundant, reliable testimony ; that the only way in which he 
can ever know anything beyond his eyesight with certainty, 
is to gather testimony about it, and compare the evidence, 
and inquire into the character of the witnesses ; that when 
one has done so, he becomes so satisfied of the truth of the 
report that he would rather risk his life upon it than upon 



152 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 



the certainty of any mathematical problem, or of any scien- 
tific truth, whatever — that ninety-nine out of every hun- 
dred citizens of the United States are a thousand times 
more certain that the Yankees whipped the British in 1776, 
declared the Colonies free and independent States, and made 
Washington President, than they ever will be that all bod- 
ies attract each other directly as their mass, and inversely 
as the squares of their distances, that the sum of the angles 
of any triangle is equal to two right angles, or that the earth 
is nearer the sun in winter than in summer — and that cer- 
tainty about the Bible history is just as attainable, and just 
as reliable, as certainty about American history, if he will 
seek it in the same way — and if he is really desirous to know 
how this Book was written, which alone in the world teaches 
men how to obtain peace with G-od, how to live well, and 
how to die with a firm and joyful hope of a resurrection to 
life eternal, and what part of it is easiest to prove either 
true or false — then he will take the inductive mode. He 
will begin at the present time, and trace the history up to 
the times in which the Book was written. He will ascer- 
tain what he can about that part of it which was last writ- 
ten — the New Testament — and begin with that part of it 
which lies nearest him — the Epistles. 

By the comparison of the documents themselves, with all 
kinds of history and monuments which throw light on the 
period, he will try to ascertain whether they are genuine or 
not. And from one well-ascertained position he will pro- 
ceed to another, until he has traversed the whole ground of 
the genuineness of the writings, the truth of the story, and 
the divine authority of the doctrine. 

This is my plan of investigation; one thing at a time, and 
the nearest first. It is not worth while to inquire whether 
it be inspired by Grod, if it be really a forgery of impostors; 
nor whether the gospel story is worthy of credit, if the only 
book which contains it be a religious novel of the third or 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 153 

fourth century. We dismiss then the questions of the in- 
spiration, or even the truth of the New Testament, till we 
have ascertained its authors. We take up the Book, and 
find that it purports to be a relation of the planting of the 
Church of Christ, of its laws and ordinances, and of the 
life, death and resurrection of its Founder, written by eight 
of his companions, at various periods and places, toward the 
close of the first century. There is a general opinion among 
all Christians that the Book was composed then, and by 
these persons. We want to know why they think so? In 
short, is it a genuine book, or merely a collection of myths 
with the apostles' names appended to them by some lying 
monks? Is it a fact, or a forgery? 

In any historical inquiry, we want some fixed point of 
time from which to take our departure ; and in this case we 
want to know if there is any period of antiquity in which 
undeniably this Book was in existence, and received as gen- 
uine by Christian societies. For I will not suppose my 
readers as ignorant as some of those Infidels who allege that 
it was made by the Bible Society. It used to be the fashion 
with those of them who pretended to learning, to affirm that 
it was made by the Council of Laodicea, in A. D. 364; be- 
cause, in order to guard the churches against spurious 
epistles and gospels, that Council published a list of those 
which the apostles did actually write, which thenceforth 
were generally bound in one volume. 

Before that time, the four Gospels were aways bound in 
one volume and called ''The Gospel." The Acts of the Apos- 
tles and the Epistles universally and undoubtedly known 
to be written by Paul, to the churches of Thessalonica, 
Galatia, Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, Colosse, and to 
Philemon, a well-known resident of that city, and those to 
Timothy and Titus, missionaries of world-wide celebrity, 
the First General Epistle of Peter, and the First General 
Epistle of John, which were at once widely circulated to 



154 WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 

check prevailing heresies — were bound in another volume 
and called " The Apostle." The Epistle to the Hebrews, 
being general, and anonymous, i. e., not bearing the name of 
any particular church, or person, to whom anybody who 
merely looked at it could refer for proof of its genuineness, 
as in the case of the other Epistles — was not so soon known 
by the European churches to be written by Paul. The Gen- 
eral Epistles of James, Jude, and the Second General Epis- 
tle of Peter, lying under the same difficulty, and besides 
being very disagreeable to easy-going Christians, from their 
sharp rebukes of hypocrisy, and the Second and Third Epis- 
tles of John, from their brevity, and the Revelation of John, 
being one of the last written of all the books of the New 
Testament, and the most mysterious — were not so generally 
known beyond the churches where the originals were depos- 
ited, until the other two collections had been formed. They 
were accordingly kept as separate books, and sometimes 
bound up in a third volume of apostolical writings. Be- 
sides these, at the time of the Council of Laodicea, and for 
a long time before, other books, written by Barnabas, Clem- 
ent, Polycarp, and other companions and disciples of the 
apostles, and forged gospels and epistles attributed by here- 
tics to the apostles, were circulated through the churches, 
and read by Christians. The Council of Laodicea did, what 
many learned men had done before them ; it investigated 
the evidence upon which any of these books was attributed 
to an apostle; and finding evidence to satisfy them, 
that the Gospel written by Luke had the sanction 
of the Apostle Paul, that the Gospel of Mark was re- 
vised by the Apostle Peter, that the Epistle to the Hebrews 
was written by Paul, and the other Epistles by John, Jude, 
James, and Peter, respectively, and not finding evidence to 
satisfy them about the Revelation of J ohn, they expressed 
their opinion, and the grounds of it, for the information of 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 155 

the world.* Into these reasons we will hereafter inquire, 
for our faith in Holy Scripture does not rest on their can- 
ons. We are not now asking what they thought, but what 
they did; and we find that they did criticise certain books, 
reported to be written by the apostles of Jesus Christ some 
three hundred years before, approve some, and reject others 
as spurious, and publish a list of those they thought genu- 
ine. Infidels admit this, and on the strength of it long as- 
serted that the Council of Laodicea made the New Testa- 
ment. At length they became ashamed of the stupid 
absurdity of alleging that men could criticise the claims, and 
catalogue the names of books before they were written ; and 
they now shift back the writing — or the authentication of 
the New Testament — for they are not quite sure which, 
though the majority incline to the former — to the Emperor 
Constantine, and the Council of Nice, which met in the year 
325. Why they have fixed on the Council of Nice is more 
than I can tell. They might as well say the Council of 
Trent, or the Westminster Assembly, either of which had 
just as much to do with the Canon of Scripture. However, 
on some vague hearsay that the Council of Nice and the 
Emperor Constantine made the Bible, hundreds in this city 
are now risking the salvation of their souls. 

We have in this assertion, nevertheless, as many facts ad- 
mitted as will serve our present purpose. There did exist, 
then, undeniably, in the year 325, large numbers of Chris- 
tian churches in the Roman Empire, sufficiently numerous 
to make it politic, in the opinion of Infidels, for a candidate 
for the empire to profess Christianity ; sufficiently powerful 
to secure his success, notwithstanding the desperate strug- 
gles of the heathen party; and sufficiently religious, or if 
you like superstitious, to make it politic for an emperor and 
his politicians to give up the senate, the court, the camp, 



* Acta Concitia, sub voce Laodicea, Canon iv. Lardner vi. p. 368. 



156 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 



the chase, and the theater, and weary themselves with loDg 
prayers, and longer speeches, of preachers about Bible re- 
ligion. Xow that is certainly a remarkable fact, and all the 
more remarkable if we inquire. How came it so? For these 
men, preachers, prince, and people, were brought up to wor- 
ship Jupiter and the thirty thousand gods of Olympus, 
after the heathen fashion, and to leave the care of religion 
to heathen priests, who never troubled their heads about 
books or doctrines after they had offered their sacrifices. In 
all the records of the world there is no instance of a general 
council of heathen priests to settle the religion of their 
people. How happens it then that the human race has of 
a sudden waked up to such a strange sense of the folly of 
idolatry and the value of religion? The Council of Xice, 
and the Emperor Constantine, and his counselors, making a 
Bible is a proof of a wonderful revolution in the world's re- 
ligion ; a phenomenon far more surprising than if the Sec- 
retaries of State, and the Senate, and President Grant should 
leave the Capital to post off to London, to attend the meet- 
ings of a Methodist Conference, assembled to make a hymn 
book. Xow what is the cause of this remarkable conver- 
sion of prince, priests, and people ? How did they all get 
religion? How did they get it so suddenly? How did they 
get so much of it ? 

The Infidel gives no answer, except to tell us* that the 
austerity, purity, and zeal of the first Christians, their good 
discipline, their belief in the resurrection of the body and 
the general judgment, and their persuasion that Christ and 
his apostles wrought miracles, had made a great many con- 
verts. This is just as if I inquired how a great fire origin- 
ated, and you should tell me that it burned fast because it 
was very hot. What I want to know is, how it happened 
that these licentious Greeks, and Romans, and Asiatics, be- 



* Gibbons Decline and Fall, II. p. 267. 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 



157 



came austere and pure; how these frivolous philosophers 
suddenly became so zealous about religion ; what implanted 
the belief of the resurrection of the body and of the judg- 
ment to come in the skeptical minds of these heathen scoff- 
ers; and how did the pagans of Italy, Egypt, Spain, Ger- 
many, Britain, come to believe in the miracles of one who 
lived hundreds of years before, and thousands of miles away, 
or to care a straw whether the written accounts of them were 
true or false? According to the Infidel account, the Coun- 
cil of Nice, and the Emperor Constantine's Bible-making, is 
a most extraordinary business — a phenomenon without any 
natural cause, and they will allow no supernatural — a greater 
miracle than any recorded in the Bible. 

If we inquire, however, of the parties attending that 
Council, what the state of the case is, we shall learn that 
they believed — whether truly or erroneously we are not 
now inquiring — but they believed, that a teacher sent from 
God, had appeared in Palestine two hundred and ninety 
years before, and had taught this religion which they had 
embraced ; had performed wonderful miracles, such as open- 
ing the eyes of the blind, healing lepers, and raising the 
dead; that he had been put to death by the Roman Gover- 
nor, Pontius Pilate, had risen again from the dead, had 
spoken to hundreds of people, and had gone out and in 
among them for six weeks after his resurrection; that he 
had ascended up through the air, to heaven, in the sight of 
numbers of witnesses, and had promised that he would come 
again in the clouds of heaven, to raise the dead, and to 
judge every man according to his works; that before he 
went away he appointed twelve of his intimate companions 
to teach his religion to the world, giving them power to 
work miracles in proof of their divine commission, and re- 
quiring mankind to hear them as they would hear him ; that 
they and their followers did so, in spite of persecutions, 
sufferings, and death, with so much success, that immense 



158 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 



numbers were persuaded to give up idolatry and its filtlii- 
ness, and to profess Christianity and its holiness, and to 
brave the fury of the heathen mob, and the vengeance of 
the Roman law; that a difference of opinion having arisen 
among them as to whether this teacher was an angel from 
heaven, or God, whether they should pray and sing psalms 
to Him, as Athanasius and his party believed, or only give 
Him some lesser honor as Arius and his party believed, and 
this difference making all the difference between idolatry on 
the one hand, and impiety on the other, and so involving 
their everlasting salvation or damnation, they had embraced 
the first opportunity after the cessation of persecution, and 
the accession of the first Christian Emperor, to assemble 
three hundred and eighteen of their most learned clergy- 
men, of both sides, and from all countries between Spain 
and Persia, to discuss these solemn questions; and that, 
through the whole of the discussions, both sides -appealed 
to the writings of the apostles, as being then well known, 
and of unquestioned authority with every one who held the 
Christian name. These facts, being utterly indisputable, are 
acknowledged by all persons, Infidel or Christian, at all ac- 
quainted with history.* 

Here, then, we have the books of the New Testament at 
the Council of Nice well known to the whole world; and 
the Council, so far from giving any authority to them, hom- 
ing to theirs — both Arian and Orthodox with one consent 
acknowledging that the whole Christian world received them 
* as the writings of the apostles of Christ. There were ven- 
erable men of fourscore and ten at that Council ; if these 
books had been first introduced in their lifetime, they must 
have known it. There were men there whose parents had 

* The original authorities may be found collected in the fourth 
volume of Lardner's Credibility of the Gospel History ; abstracts 
of them, with ample references, in Mosheim and Neander's Eccle- 
siastical Histories, and in Stanley's Eastern Church, 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 159 

heard the Scriptures read in church from their childhood, 
and so could not be imposed upon with a new Bible. The 
New Testament could not be less than three generations old, 
else one or other of the disputants would have exposed the 
novelty of its introduction, from his own information. The 
Council of Nice, then, did not make the New Testament. 
It was a book well known, ancient, and of undoubted au- 
r thority among all Christians, ages before that Council. The 
existence of the New Testament Scriptures, then, ages before 
the Council of Nice, is a great fact. 

We next take up the assertions, propounded with a show 
of learning, that the books of the New Testament, and es- 
pecially the G-ospels, were not in use, and were not known 
till the third century ; that they are not the productions of 
contemporary writers ; that the alleged ocular testimony or 
proximity in point of time of the sacred historians to the 
events recorded is mere assumption, originating in the titles 
which Biblical books bear in our canon; that we stand here 
(in the gospel history), upon purely mythical and poetical 
ground ; and that the Gospels and Epistles are a gradually 
formed collection of myths, having little or no historic 
reality. So Strauss, Eichorn, DeWette, and their disciples 
here, attempt to set aside the New Testament. In plain 
English, it is a collection of forgeries. 

These assertions are absurd. In the hundred years be- 
tween the death of the apostles, and the beginning of the 
third century, there was not time to form a mythology. The 
times of Trajan's persecution, and that of the philosophic 
Aurelius, and the busy bustling age of Severus, were not the 
times for such a business. Bigoted Jews would not, and 
could not, have made such a character as Jesus of Nazareth ; 
and the philosophers of that day, Celsus and Porphyry, 
for instance, hated it when presented to them as heartily 
as either Strauss or Paine. There were not wanting thou- 
sands of enemies, able and willing, to expose such a forgery. 



160 WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 

The aspect and character of the gospel narrative are to- 
tally unlike those of mythologies. Hear the verdict of one 
who confessedly stands at the head of the roll of oriental 
historians: a In no single respect — if we except the fact 
that it is miraculous — has that story a mythical character. 
It is a single story, told without variations ; whereas myths 
are fluctuating and multiform: it is blended inextricably 
with the civil history of the times, which it everywhere re- 
ports with extraordinary accuracy ; whereas myths distort 
or supersede civil history : it is full of prosaic detail, which 
myths studiously eschew : it abounds with practical instruc- 
tion of the simplest and purest kind ; whereas myths teach by 
allegory. Even in its miraculous element it stands to some 
extent in contrast with all mythologies, where the marvel- 
ous has ever a predominant character of grotesqueness 
which is absent from New Testament miracles. (This Strauss 
himself admits, Leben Jesu, 1—67.) Simple earnestness, 
fidelity, painstaking accuracy, pure love of truth, are the 
most patent characteristics of the New Testament writers, 
who evidently deal with facts, not with fancies, and are em- 
ployed in relating a history, not in developing an idea. They 
write that c we may know the certainty of the things which 
are most surely believed ' in their day. They ' bear record 
of what they have seen and heard.' I know not how stronger 
words could have been used to prevent the notion of that 
plastic, growing myth which Strauss conceives to have been 
in apostolic times. "* 

The character of Christ exhibited in the G-ospels is the 
contrary of that of the heroes of mythology; as contrary 
as holiness is to sin. The invention of such a character by 
any man, or by the wisest set of men who ever lived, would 
have been a miracle nearly as great as the existence of such 
a person. When the character of Christ was presented to 



* Kawlinson's Historical Evidences, page 227. 



WHO WROTE TIIE NEW TESTAMENT? IGl 

the wisest men of the Greeks, and Romans, and Hebrews, so 
far from admiring him as a hero, they crucified him as an im- 
postor, and persecuted the preachers of his gospel. There 
was nothing mythical in the ten persecutions; these at least 
were hard historical facts. Every line of examination of 
time, place, and circumstances proves the falsehood of the 
mythical theory, and establishes the truth of the gospel 
history. 

The authenticity of the gospel history, and of the Apos- 
tolic Epistles is confirmed by the testimony of their ene- 
mies. It is a well-authenticated and undeniable fact, that, 
in the close of the second century, Celsus, an Epieurean 
philosopher, wrote a work against Christianity, entitled, "The 
Word of Truth," in which he quotes passages from the New 
Testament, and so many of them, that from the fragments 
of his work which remain, we could gather all the principal 
facts of the birth, teaching, miracles, death, and resurrec- 
tion of Jesus Christ, if the New Testament should be lost. 
If Paine quotes the New Testament to ridicule it, no man 
can deny that such a book was in existence at the time he 
wrote. If he takes the pains to write a book to confute it, 
it is self-evident that it is in circulation, and possessed of 
influence. So Celsus' attempt to reply to the Grospels, and 
his quotations from them, are conclusive proofs that these 
books were generally circulated and believed, and held to 
be of authority at the time he wrote. Further, he shows 
every disposition to present every argument which could 
possibly damage the Christian cause. In fact, our modern 
Infidels have done little more than serve up his old objec- 
tions. Now nothing could have served his purpose better 
than to prove that the records of the history of Christ were 
forgeries of a late date. This would have saved him all 
further trouble, and settled the fate of Christianity conclu- 
sively. He had every opportunity of ascertaining the fact, 
11 



162 WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 

living, as he did, so near the times and scenes of the gospel 
history, and surrounded by heretics and false Christians, who 
would gladly have given him every information. But he 
never once intimates the least suspicion of such a thing — 
never questions the Gospels as books of history — nor denies 
the miracles recorded in them, but attributes them to magic * 
Here, then, we have testimony as acceptable to an Infidel as 
that of Strauss or Voltaire — in fact, utterly undeniable by 
any man of common sense — that the New Testament was 
well known and generally received by Christians as authori- 
tative, when Celsus wrote his reply to it, in the end of the 
second century. If it was a forgery, it was undoubtedly a 
forgery of old standing, if he could not detect it. 

But we will go back a step farther, and prove the antiquity 
of the New Testament by the testimony of another enemy, 
two generations older than Celsus. The celebrated heretic, 
Marcion, lived in the beginning of the second century, when 
he had the best opportunity of discovering a forgery in the 
writings of the New Testament, if any such existed; he 
was excommunicated by the Church, and being greatly en- 
raged thereat, had every disposition to say the worst he 
could about it. He traveled all the way from Sinope on the 
Black Sea, to Borne, and through Galatia, Bithynia^ Asia 
Minor, Greece, and Italy, the countries where the apostles 
preached, and the churches to which they wrote, but never 
found any one to suggest the idea of a forgery to him. He 
affirmed that the Gospel of Matthew, the Epistle to the 
Hebrews, those of James and Peter, and the whole of the 
Old Testament, were books only for Jews, and published a 
new and altered edition of the Gospel of Luke, and ten 
Epistles of Paul, for the use of his sect.f We have thus 
the most undoubted evidence, even the testimony of an en- 



* Origen Contra Celsum, passim, 
t Lardner, Vol. IX. page 858. 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 163 



emy, that these books were in existence, and generally re- 
ceived as apostolical and authoritative by Christians, at the 
beginning of the second century, or within twenty years of 
the last of the apostles, and by the churches to which they 
had preached and written. 

The only remaining conceivable cavil against the genuine- 
ness of the books of the New Testament is: " That they bear 
internal evidence of being collections of fragments written 
by different persons — and are probably merely traditions com- 
mitted to writing by various unknown writers, and afterward 
collected and issued to the churches under the names of the 
apostles, for the sake of greater authority." This theory 
being received as gospel by several learned men, has fur- 
nished matter for lengthy discussions as to the sources of 
the four Gospels. Translated into English, it amounts to 
this, that Brown, Smith, and Jones wrote out a number of 
essays and anecdotes, and persuaded the churches of Ephe- 
sus, Jerusalem, Antioch, Corinth, and the rest, to receive 
them as the writings of their ministers, who had lived for 
years, or were then living, among them ; and on the strength 
of that notion of their being the writings of the apostles, 
to govern their whole lives by these essays, and lay down 
their lives and peril their souls' salvation on the truth of 
these anecdotes. As though they could not tell whether 
such documents were forgeries or not ! 

It is almost incredible how ignorant dreaming book-worms 
are of the common business of life. Most of my readers 
will laugh at the idea of a serious answer to such a quibble. 
Nevertheless, for the sake of those whose inexperience may 
be abused by the authority of learned names, I will show 
them that the primitive Christians, supposing them able to 
read, could know whether their ministers did really write 
the books and letters which they received from them. 

If you go into the Citizens' Bank, you will find a large 
folio volume lying on the counter, and on looking at it you 



164 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 



will see that it is filled with men's names, in their own hand- 
writing, and that no two of them are exactly alike. Every 
person who has any business to transact with the bank is 
requested to write his name in the book; and when his 
check comes afterward for payment, the clerk can tell at a 
glance if the signature is the same as that of which he has 
a single specimen. If there has been no opportunity for 
him to become personally acquainted with the bank, as in 
case of a foreigner newly arrived, he brings letters of intro- 
duction from some well-known mutual friend, or is accom- 
panied by some respectable citizen, who attests his identity. 
Business men have no difficulty whatever in ascertaining 
the genuineness of documents. It is only when people want 
to dispute Holy Scripture that they give up common sense. 

Holy Scripture was known to be the genuine writing of 
the apostles, just in the same way as any other writing was 
known to be genuine; only the churches who received the 
writings of the apostles had ten thousand times better se- 
curity against forgery than any bank in the Union. In one 
of the first letters Paul writes to the churches — the second 
letter to the Thessalonians — to whom he had been preach- 
ing only a few weeks before, sent from Athens, distant only 
some two days' journey, full of allusions to their affairs, 
commands how to conduct themselves in the business of 
their workshops, as well as in the devotions of the church, 
and explanations of some misunderstood parts of a former 
letter sent by the hand of a mutual friend — he formally 
gives them his signature, for the purpose of future refer- 5 
ence, and comparison of any document which might pur- 
port to come from him, with that specimen of his autograph. 
He gives not the name merely, but his apostolic benediction 
also, in his own handwriting : The salutation of me Paul with 
mine own ha,nd, which is the token in every epistle : so I write. 
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. 
It shows the heart of an apostle of Christ ; but what con- 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT ? 1G5 



cerns the present question is the remark, which every busi- 
ness man will in a moment appreciate, how immensely the 
addition of these two lines adds to the security against forg- 
ery. It is a very hard thing to forge a signature, but give 
a business man two lines of any man's writing besides that, 
and he is perfectly secure against imposition.* 

The churches to which the Epistles were written, and to 
which the Gospels were delivered, consisted largely of bus- 
iness men, of merchants and traders, tent makers and copper- 
smiths, city chamberlains, and officers of Caesar's household, 
and the like. Does any one think such men could not tell 
the handwriting of their minister, who had lived among 
them for years ; or that men who were risking their lives 
for the instructions he wrote them, would care less about 
the genuineness of the documents, than you do about the 
genuineness of a ten dollar check? I am not as long in this 
city as Paul was in Ephesus, nor one fourth of the time 
that John lived there, yet I defy all the advocates of the 
mythical theory of Germany, and all their disciples here, to 
write a myth half as long as this essay, and impose it on the 
elders and members of my church as my writing. Let it 
only be presented in manuscript to the congregation — there 
was no printing in Paul's days — and in five minutes a dozen 
members of the church will detect the forgery, even if I 
should hold my peace. And were I to leave on a mission 
to China or India, and write letters to the church, would 
any of these business men, who have seen my writing, have 
the least hesitation in recognizing it again ? Do you think 
anybody could forge a letter as from me, and impose it on 
them ? What an absurdity, then, to suppose that anybody 
could write a gospel or epistle, and get all the members of 
a large church to believe that an Apostle wrote it. The 
first Christians, then, were absolutely certain that the docu- 

*In fact, some persons were trying to impose a letter, "as from 
us, " containing declarations, that the day of Christ was upon them. 



166 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 



nients which they received as apostolic, were really so. The 
Church of Rome could attest the Epistle to them, and the 
Gospels of Mark and Luke written there. The Church of 
Ephesus could attest the Epistle to them, and the Gospel, 
and Letters, and Revelation of John written there. And so 
on of all the other churches ; and these veritable autographs 
were long preserved. Says Tertullian, who was ordained 
A. D. 192 : " Well, if you he willing to exercise your cur- 
iosity profitably in the business of your salvation, visit the 
apostolical churches in which the very chairs of the apos- 
tles still preside — in which their authentic letters them- 
selves are recited (apud quae ijpsce authenticce literce eorum 
recitantur), sounding forth the voice and representing the 
countenance of each one of them. Is Achaia near you, you 
have Corinth. If you are not far from Macedonia, you have 
Philippi, you have Thessalonica. If you can go to Asia, 
you have Ephesus ; but if you are near to Italy, you have 
Rome." There can not be the least doubt about the pre- 
servation of documents for a far longer time than from Paul 
to Tertullian — one hundred and fifty years. I hold in my 
hand a Bible, the family Bible of the Gibsons — printed in 
1599 — two hundred and fifty-seven years old, in perfect 
preservation ; and we have manuscripts of the Scriptures 
twelve to fourteen hundred years old, like the Sinaitic Codex, 
perfectly legible. 

They were moreover directed to be publicly read in the 
churches, and they were publicly read every Lord"s day. 
Is it credible that an impostor would direct his forgery to 
be publicly read ? If the epistle was publicly read during 
Paul's lifetime, that public reading in the hearing of the 
men who could so easily disprove its genuineness, was con- 
clusive proof to all who heard it, that they knew it to be 
the genuine writing of the Apostle. The primitive churches 
then had conclusive proof of the genuineness of the Apos- 
tolic Epistles and Gospels. 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 



107 



The only difficulty which now remains is the objection 
that they might have been corrupted by alterations and 
interpolations by monks, in later times. We have two se- 
curities against such corruptions, in the way these documents 
were given, and the nature of their contents. They were 
sacred heirlooms, and they were public documents. Could 
you, or could any man, have permission to alter the original 
copy of Washington's Farewell Address? Would not the 
man who should attempt such sacrilege be torn in a thou- 
sand pieces? But Washington will never be an object of 
such veneration as John, nor will his Farewell Address ever 
compare in importance with Paul's Farefrell Letter to the 
Philippians. Besides, these Gospels and Letters were public 
documents, containing the records of laws, in obedience to 
which men are daily crossing their inclinations, enduring 
the mockery of their neighbors, losing their money, and en- 
dangering their lives. They contained the proofs and prom- 
ises of that religious faith in God and hope of heaven, for 
the sake of which they suffered such things. Is it credible 
that they would allow them to be altered and corrupted? 
You might far more rationally talk of altering the Declara- 
tion of Independence, or the Constitution of the United 
States. Translated into different languages — transported 
into Britain, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Greece, Turkey, 
Carthage, Egypt, Parthia, Persia, India, and China — com- 
mitted to memory by children, and quoted in the writings 
of Christian authors of the first three centuries, to such an 
extent, that we can gather the whole of the New Testament, 
except twenty-six verses, from their writings — appealed to 
as authority by heretics and orthodox in controversy — and 
publicly read in the hearing of tens of hundreds of thousands 
every Sabbath day in worship — we are a thousand times 
more certain that the New Testament has not been cor- 
rupted, than we are that the Declaration of Independence 
is genuine. 



168 



WHO WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT? 



On this ground then we plant ourselves. The whole story 
of a late and gradual formation of the New Testament, or, 
in plain English, of its forgery, stands out as an unmitigated 
falsehood in the eyes of every man capable of writing his own 
name. The first churches could not be deceived with for- 
geries for apostolic writings. Nor could they, if they would, 
allow these writings to be corrupted. Be they true or false, 
fact or fiction, the books of the New Testament are the 
words of the Apostles of our Lord and Savior J esus Christ. 
In the next chapter we will inquire into the truth of their 
story. 



CHAPTER VI. 



Js ^HE J3-OSPEL j^ACT OR j^ABLE ? 



" For they themselves show of us what manner of entering in we 
had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idol-, to serve the 
living and true God ; and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom 
he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the 
wrath to come." — 1 Thess. i. 9, 10. 



In the last chapter we ascertained that the Gospels and 
Epistles were not forgeries of some nameless monks of the 
third century — that the shopkeepers, silversmiths, tent- 
makers, coppersmiths, tanners, physicians, senators, town 
councilors, officers of customs, city treasurers, and nobles 
of Cassar's household, in Rome, Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, 
Athens, and Alexandria, could no more be imposed upon in 
the matter of documents, attested by the well-known signa- 
tures of their beloved ministers, than you could by forged 
letters or sermons purporting to come from your own pastor 
— and that the documents which they believed to contain 
the directory of their lives, and the charter- of that salva- 
tion which they valued more than their lives, which they 
read in their churches, recited at their tables, quoted in 
their writings, appealed to in their controversies, translated 
into many languages, and dispersed into every part of the 
known world, they neither would, nor could, corrupt or 
falsify. 

The genuineness of the copies of the New Testament, 

which we now possess, is abundantly proved by the compar- 

(169) 



170 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



ison of over two thousand manuscripts, from all parts of the 
world: scrutinized during a period of nearly a hundred 
years, by the most critical scholars, so accurately that the 
variations of such thing- as would correspond to the cross- 
ing of a t, or the dotting of an i. in English, have been care- 
fully enumerated; yet the result of the whole of this 
searching scrutiny has been merely the suggestion of a score 
of unimportant alterations in the received text of the seven 
thousand nine hundred and fifty-nine verses of the Xew 
Testament. This is a fact utterly unexampled in the his- 
tory of manuscripts. There are but six manuscripts of the 
Comedies of Terence, and these have not been copied once 
for every thousand times the New Testament has been tran- 
scribed, yet there are thirty thousand variations found in 
these six manuscripts, or an average of five thousand for 
each, and many of them seriously affect the sense. The 
average number of variations in the manuscripts of the 
New Testament examined; is not quite thirty for each, in- 
cluding all the trivialities already noticed. 

We are, then, by the special providence of God, now as 
undoubtedly in possession of genuine copies of the Gospels 
and Epistles, written by the companions of Jesus, as we are 
of genuine copies of the Constitution of the United States, 
and of the Declaration of Independence. These are historic 
documents, of well-established genuineness and antiquity, 
which we now proceed to examine as to their truthfulness. 

There is nd history so trustworthy as that prepared by 
contemporary writers, especially by those who have them- 
selves been actively engaged in the events which they relate. 
Such history never loses its interest, nor does the lapse of 
ago-, in the least degree, impair its credibility. While the 
documents can be preserved. Xenophoms Retreat of the 
Ten Thousand. Caesar's Gallic War. and the Dispatches of 
the Duke of Wellington; will be as trustworthy as on the 
day they were written. Yet some suspicion may arise in 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



•171 



our minds, that these commanders and historians might have 
kept back some important events which would have dimmed 
their reputation with posterity, or might have colored those 
they have related, so as to add to their fame. Of the great 
facts related in memoirs addressed to their companions in 
arms, able at a glance to detect a falsehood, we never enter- 
tain the least suspicion. 

If, to this be added, the correspondence of monuments, 
architecture, painting, statuary, coins, heraldry, and a 
thousand changes in the manners and customs of a people, 
we become as absolutely convinced of the truth of the 
narrative thus confirmed by these silent witnesses as if 
we had seen the events described. No man who visits the 
disinterred city of Pompeii, and sees the pavements marked 
by the wheel ruts, has any doubt that the Romans used 
wheeled carriages. When he sees the court-yards adorned 
with mosaic figures, and the walls with paintings of the 
gods, and of the manners of the people who worshiped 
them, he is profoundly impressed with the conviction that 
they excelled in the fine arts, and in the coarse vices of 
heathenism. When he visits the Coliseum, that vast ruin 
declares that the wealth of an empire, once devoted to the 
gratification of the most savage passions, has been diverted 
into some other channel. When he visits the catacombs, 
and reads long lines of heathen epitaphs, with their despair- 
ing symbols of broken columns, extinguished torches, and 
their heart-breaking " Farewell ! an eternal farewell!" and 
then turns to the monuments o'f only two centuries later, 
and reads, "He sleeps in the Lord," "He waits the resur- 
rection to life eternal," recording the hopes of whole gener- 
ations of survivors, he can not doubt the truth of the writ- 
ten records of the conversion of the Roman Empire. 

There is, moreover, another kind of contemporary history 
not so connected and regular as the formal diary or journal, 
which does not even propose to relate history at all, but is 



172 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



for that very reason entirely removed from the suspicion of 
giving a coloring to it ; which, at the cost of a little patience 
and industry, gives us the most convincing confirmations of 
the truth, or exposures of the mistakes of historians, by the 
undesigned and incidental way in which the use of a name, 
a date, a proverb, a jest, an expletive, a quotation, an allu- 
sion, flashes conviction upon the reader's mind. I mean 
contemporary correspondence. If we have the private let- 
ters of celebrated men laid before us, we are enabled to look 
right into them, and see their true character. Thus Macau- 
lay exhibits to the world the proud, lying, ^ stupid tyrant, 
James, displayed in his own letters. Thus Voltaire records 
himself an adulterer, and begs his friend, D'Alembert, to lie 
for him ; his friend replies that he has done so. Thus the 
correspondence of the great American herald of the Age of 
Reason exhibits him drinking a quart of brandy daily at 
his friend's expense, and refusing to pay his bill for board- 
ing. In the unguarded freedom of confidential correspond- 
ence the vail is taken from the heart. We see men as they 
are. The true man stands out in his native dignity, and the 
gilding is rubbed off the hypocrite. Give the world their 
letters, and let the grave silence the plaudits and the clam- 
ors which deafened the generation among whom they lived, 
and no man will hesitate whether or not to pronounce Hume 
a sensualist, or Washington the noblest work of God —an 
honest man. 

If we add another test of truthfulness, by increasing the 
number of the witnesses, comparing a number of letters re- 
ferring to the same events, written by persons of various 
degrees of education, and of different occupations and ranks 
of life, resident in different countries, acting independently 
of each other, and find them all agree in their allusions to, 
or direct mention of, some central facts concerning which 
they are all interested, no one can rightfully doubt that this 
undesigned agreement declares the truth. But if, in addi- 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



173 



tion to all these undesigned coincidences, we happen upon 
the correspondence of persons whose interests and passions 
were diametrically opposed to those of our correspondents, 
and find that, when they have occasion to refer to them, they 
also confirm the great facts already ascertained, then our 
belief becomes conviction which can not be overturned by 
any sophistry, that these things did occur. If Whig and 
Tory agree in relating the facts of James' flight, and Wil- 
liam's accession, if the letters of his Jacobite friends and 
those of the French embassador confirm the statements of 
the English historian, and if we are put in possession of the 
letters which James himself wrote from France and Ireland 
to his friends in England, does any man in his- common 
sense doubt that the Revolution of 1688 did actually occur? 

When, in addition to all this concentration and converg- 
ence of testimony, one finds that the matters related, being 
of public concern, and the changes effected for the public 
weal, the people have ever since observed, and do to this 
day celebrate, by religious worship and public rejoicings, the 
anniversaries of the principal events of that Revolution, and 
that he himself has been present, and has heard the thanks- 
givings, and witnessed the rejoicings on those anniversaries, 
the facts of the history come out from the domains of learned 
curiosity, and take their stand on the market-place of the 
busy world's engagements. We become at once conscious 
that this is a practical question — a great fact which concerns 
us— that the whole of the law and government of a vast 
empire has felt its impress — that our ancestors and ourselves 
have been molded under its influence, and that the religion 
of Europe and America, under whose guardianship we have 
grown to a prominent place among the people of earth, and 
may arrive at a better prominence among the nations of the 
saved, has been secured by that Revolution. We could 
scarcely know whether most to pity or contemn the man 
who should labor to persuade us that such a Revolution had 



174 



IS THE GOSPEL PACT OR FABLE ? 



never occurred, or that the facts had been essentially mis- 
represented. 

Now it is precisely on this kind of evidence that we be- 
lieve the great facts of the Christian Revolution. We have 
contemporary histories, formal and informal ; letters, public 
and private, from the principal agents in it, and opposers of 
it, dispersed from Babylon to Koine, and addressed to Greeks, 
Romans, Jews, and Asiatics, written by physicians, fisher- 
men, proconsuls, emperors, and apostles. We have miles of 
monuments, paintings, statuary, cabinets of coins, and all 
the heraldry of Christendom. And these great facts stand 
out more prominently on the theater of the world's business 
as effecting changes on our laws and lives, and their intro- 
duction as authenticated by public commemorations, more 
solemn and more numerous than those resulting from the 
English or the American Revolution. Our main difficulty 
lies in selecting, from the vast mass of materials, a portion 
sufficiently distinct and manageable to be handled in a single 
essay. 

We shall be guided by the motto already announced as 
the rule of inductive research. One thing at a time ; and 
the nearest first. The Epistles, being nearer our own times 
than the Grospels, claim our first notice, and first among 
these, those which stand latest on the page of sacred his- 
tory, the letters of John ; two from Peter to the Christians 
of Asia; and those which Paul, in chains for the gospel, 
dictated from imperial Rome. 

Prom the abundant notices of the early Christians by his- 
torians and philosophers, satirists and comedians, martyrs 
and magistrates, Jewish, Christian, and heathen, I shall select 
only two for comparison with the Epistles and of the apos- 
tles; and both those heathen — the celebrated letter of Pliny 
to Trajan, and the well-established history of Tacitus; both 
utterly undeniable, and admitted by the most skeptical to 
be above suspicion. Not that I suppose that the testimony 



IS TIIE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



175 



of men who do not take the trouble of making any inquiry 
into the reality of the facts of the Christian religion is 
more accurate than that of those whose lives were devoted 
to its study; or that we have any just reason to attach as 
much weight to the assertions of persons, who, by their own 
showing, tortured and murdered men and women convicted 
of no crime but that of bearing the name of Christ, as to 
those of these martyrs, whose characters they acknowledged 
to be blameless, and who sealed their testimony with the 
last and highest attestation of sincerity — their blood. Con- 
sidered merely as a historian, whether, as regards means of 
knowledge, or tests of truthfulness, by every unprejudiced 
mind, Peter will always be preferred to Pliny. But because 
the world will ever love its own, and hate the disciples of 
the Lord, there will always be a large class to whom the 
history of Tacitus will seem more veritable than that of 
Luke, and the letters of Pliny more reliable than those of 
Peter. • For their sakes we avail ourselves of that most 
convincing of all attestations — the testimony of an enemy. 
What friends and foes unite in attesting must be accepted 
as true. 

The facts which we shall thus establish are not, in the 
first instance, those called miraculous. We are now ascer- 
taining the general character for truthfulness of our letter 
writers and historians. If we find that their general his- 
toric narrative is contradicted by that of other credible his- 
torians, then we suspect their story. But if we find that, 
in all essential matters of public notoriety, they are sup- 
ported by the concurred testimony of their foes, and that 
the narrative of the miracles they relate bears the seals 
of thousands who from foes became friends, from conviction 
of its truth, then we receive their witness as true. Even 
in Paul's day, heathen Greek writers bore testimony to the 
apostles, what manner of entering in they had unto the 
converts of Thessalonica ; and how they turned to God from 



176 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



idols, to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his 
Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead — even J esus, 
who delivered us from the wrath to come. Pliny wrote 
forty years later. 

Pliny, the younger, was born A. D. 61, was praetor under 
Domitian, consul in the third year of Trajan, A. D. 100, 
was exceedingly desirous to add to his other honors that of 
the priesthood ; was accordingly consecrated an augur, and 
built temples, bought images, and consecrated them on his 
estates; was, in A. D. 106, appointed Governor of the 
Roman Provinces of Pontus and Bithynia* — a vast tract 
of Asia Minor, lying along the shores of the Black Sea and 
the Propontis ; and including the province anciently called 
Mysia, in which were situated Pergamos and Thyatira, and 
in the immediate vicinity of Sardis and Philadelphia. Pliny 
reached his province by the usual route, the port of Ephe- 
sus ; where John had lived for many years, and indited his 
letters, A. D. 96, scarcely ten years before. The letters of 
Peter to the strangers scattered through Pontus, Galatia, 
Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, bring us to the same moun- 
tainous region, eight hundred miles distant from Judea; 
whence, in earlier days, our savage ancestors received those 
Phoenician priests of Baal, whose round towers mark the 
coasts of Ireland nearest to the setting sun; and whence, 
about the period under consideration, came the heralds of 
the Sun of Righteousness, who brought the "Leabhar Uoin'f 
which tells their children of him in whom is the life and the 
light of men. Natives of these countries had been in Jeru- 
salem during the crucifixion of Jesus, and, though only 
strangers, had witnessed the darkness, and the earthquake, 
and had heard the rumors of what had come to pass in those 
days; and on the day of Pentecost had mingled with the 

* Lardner VII. page 18, et seq. 

t Pronounced Laar Owen— John's Book. 



IS THE GOSPEL PACT OR FABLE ? 



177 



curious crowd around the apostles, and heard them speak, 
in their own mother tongues, of the wonderful works of 
God. The remainder of the story of their conversion we 
gather from the letters of Peter, John, and Pliny. 

"Pliny, to the Emperor Trajan, wisheth health and happiness: * 

"It is my constant custom, Sire, to refer myself to you in all 
matters concerning which I have any doubt. For who can better 
direct me when I hesitate, or instruct me when I am ignorant ? 

"I have never been present at any trials of Christians, so that I 
know not well what is the subject matter of punishment, or of in- 
quiry, or what strictures ought to be used in either. Nor have I 
been a little perplexed to determine whether any difference ought 
to be made upon account of age, or whether the young and tender, 
and the full grown and robust, ought to be treated all alike ; whether 
repentance should entitle to pardon, or whether all who have once 
been Christians ought to be punished, though they are now no 
longer so; whether the name itself, although no crimes be detected, 
or crimes only belonging to the name ought to be punished. 

" In the meantime, I have taken this course with all who have 
been brought before me, and have been accused as Christians. I 
have put the question to them, whether they were Christians. Upon 
their confessing to me that they were, I repeated the question a 
second and a third time, threatening also to punish them with 
death. Such as still persisted, I ordered away to be punished; for 
it was no doubt with me, whatever might be the nature of their 
opinion, that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy ought to be pun- 
ished. There were others of the same infatuation, whom, because 
they are Eoman citizens, I have noted down to be sent to the city. 

" In a short time the crime spreading itself, even whilst under 
persecution, as is usual in such cases, divers sorts of people came in 
my way. An information was presented to me, without mention- 
ing the author, containing the names of many persons, who, upon 
examination, denied that they were Christians, or had even been 
so; who repeated after me an invocation of the gods, and with 
wine and frankincense made supplication to your image, which, 
for that purpose, I have caused to be brought and set before them, 
together with the statues of the deities. Moreover, they reviled 



* Lib. X. Ep. 97, Lardner VII. 22. 
12 



178 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



the name of Christ. None of which things, as is said, they who 
are really Christians can by any means be compelled to do. These, 
therefore, I thought proper to discharge. 

" Others were named by an informer, who at first confessed them- 
selves Christians, and afterward denied it. The rest said they had 
been Christians, but had left them; some three years ago, some 
longer, and one or more above twenty years. They all worshiped 
your image, and the statues of the gods ; these also reviled Christ. 
They affirmed that the whole of their fault or error lay in this : 
that they were wont to meet together, on a stated day, before it 
was light, and sing among themselves alternately, a hymn to Christ 
as a God, and bind themselves by a sacrament, not to the commis- 
sion of any wickedness, but not to be guilty of theft, or robbery, 
or adulter} 7 ; never to falsify their word, nor to deny a pledge com- 
mitted to them, when called upon to return it. "When these things 
were performed, it was their custom to separate, and then to come 
together again to a meal, which they ate in common, without any 
disorder; but this they had forborne since the publication of my 
edict, by which, according to your command, I prohibited assem- 
blies. After receiving this account, I judged it the more neces- 
sary to examine two maid servants, which were called ministers, by 
torture. But I have discovered nothing besides a bad and exces- 
sive superstition. 

''Suspending, therefore, all judicial proceedings, I have recourse 
to you for advice ; for it has appeared to me a matter highly de- 
serving consideration, especially upon account of the great number 
of persons who are in danger of suffering. For many of all ages, 
and every rank, of both sexes likewise, are accused, and will be 
accused. Nor has the contagion of this superstition seized cities 
only, but the lesser towns also, and the open country. Neverthe- 
less, it seems to me that it may be restrained and arrested. It is 
certain that the temples, which were almost forsaken, begin to be 
frequented. And the sacred solemnities, after a long intermission, 
are revived. Victims, likewise, are everywhere brought up, whereas, 
for some time, there were few purchasers. Whence, it is easy to 
imagine, what numbers of men might be reclaimed, if pardon were 
granted to those whe shall repent." 

"Trajan to Pliny, wisheth health and happiness : * 

" You have taken the right course, my Pliny, in your proceed- 



* Lib. X. Ep. 93, Lardner VII. 24. 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



179 



ings with those who havo been brought before you as Christians ; 
for it is impossible to establish any one rule that shall hold univer- 
sally. They are not to be sought after. If any are brought before 
you, and are convicted, they ought to be punished. However, he 
that denies his being a Christian, and makes it evident in fact, that 
is, by supplicating to our gods, though he be suspected to have been 
so formerly, let him be pardoned upon repentance. But in no 
case, of any crime whatever, may a bill of information be received 
without being signed by him who presents it, for that would be a 
dangerous precedent, and unworthy of my government." 

I must request my reader now to procure a New Testa- 
ment, and read, at one reading, the First General Epistle of 
Peter, the First General Epistle of John, and the Seven 
Epistles to the Churches in Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, 
Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea — only about 
as much matter as four pages of Harper 's Magazine, or half 
a page of the Commercial — that he may be able to do the 
same justice to the apostles as to the governor. He will 
thus be able to see the force of the various allusions to the 
numbers, doctrines, morals, persecutions, and perseverance 
of the Christians, contained in those letters; the object 
which I have in view being, to establish their authenticity 
by proving the truthfulness of their allusions to these 
things. If you think this too much trouble, please lay 
down the book, and dismiss the consideration of religion 
from your thoughts. If the letters of the apostles are not 
worth a careful reading, it is of no consequence whether 
they are true or false. 

1. These letters take for granted, that the fact of the 
existence of large numbers of Christians, organized into 
churches, and meeting regularly for religious worship, at 
the close of the first century, is a matter of public notoriety 
to the world. Here, in countries eight hundred miles dis- 
tant from its birthplace, in the lifetime of those who had 
seen its founder crucified, we find Christians scattered over 



180 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR EABLE ? 



Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia — churches 
in seven provincial cities, the sect well known to Pliny, be- 
fore he left Italy, as a proscribed and persecuted religion, 
the professors of which were customarily brought before 
courts for trial and punishment — though he had not himself 
been present at such trials — and now so numerous in his 
provinces, that a great number of persons, of both sexes, 
young and old, of all ranks, natives and Roman citizens, 
professed Christianity. Others, influenced by their exam- 
ple and instruction, renounced idolatry; victims were not 
led to sacrifice ; the sacred rites of the gods were suspended, 
and their temples forsaken. The existence, then, of churches 
of Christ, consisting of vast numbers of converted hea- 
thens, at the close of the first century, is in no wise mytho- 
logical or dubious. It is an established historical fact. The 
Epistles of the apostles stand confirmed by the Epistles of 
the governor and the emperor. 

2. The second great fact presented in the Epistles, and 
confirmed by the letters of the governor and the emperor, 
is, that the worship of the Christian Church then was es- 
sentially the same which it is now. We find these Chris- 
tians of the first century commemorating the death and 
resurrection of Christ, and rendering divine honors to him ; 
the "stated day" on which they assembled for worship, 
and the "common meal," are as plain a description of the 
"disciples coming together upon the first day of the 
week, to break bread," as a heathen could give in few 
words. Their terms of communion too, to which they 
pledged their members by a sacrament, "not to be 
guilty of theft, robbery, or adultery; never to falsify their 
word, or deny a pledge committed to them," find their coun- 
terpart in every well-regulated church at this day. 

The articles of the Christian faith, then, are not the 
"gradual accretions of centuries," nor is the "redemptive 
idea, as attaching to Christ, a dogma of the post- Augustine 



\ 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 181 

period." The churches of the first century commemorated 
the death and resurrection of Jesus, as that of a divine 
person, " singing the hymn to him as a God," which their 
descendants sing at this day around his table : 

" Forever and forever is, O God, thy throne of might, 
The scepter of thy kingdom is a scepter that is right, 
Thou lovest right, and hatest ill ; for God, thy God, Most High, 
Above thy fellows hath with th' oil of joy anointed thee." 

And the question will force itself upon our minds, and can 
not be evaded, How did these apostles persuade such multi- 
tudes of heathens to believe their repeated assertions of the 
death, resurrection, and glory of J esus ? In the space of 
three octavo pages, Peter refers to these facts eighteen 
times. John, in like manner, repeatedly affirms them. The 
Christian religion consists in the belief of these facts, and 
a life corresponding to them. Now, how did the apostles 
persuade such multitudes of heathens to believe a report so 
wonderful, profess a religion so novel, renounce the gods 
they had worshiped from their childhood, and all the cere- 
monies of an attractive, sensual religion; "temples of splen- 
did architecture, statues of exquisite sculpture, priests and 
victims superbly adorned, attendant beauteous youth of both 
sexes, performing all the sacred rites with gracefulness ; re- 
ligious dances, illuminations, concerts of the sweetest music, 
perfumes of the rarest fragrance," and other more licentious 
enjoyments, inseparable from heathen worship. How did 
they persuade them to exchange all this for the assembly 
before daybreak, the frugal common meal, the psalm to 
Christ, and the commemoration of the death of a crucified 
malefactor? If we add, that they commemorated his res- 
urrection, by observing the Lord's day, the question comes 
up, How did they come to believe that he was risen from 
the dead? Could a few despised strangers, or a few citizens 
if you will, persuade such a community, purely by natural 
means, to believe such a report, to care whether the Syrian 



182 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



Jew died or rose, or to commemorate weekly, by a solemn 
religious service, either his death or resurrection? It is 
evident they believed what they commemorated. How did 
they come to do so ? 

But whether we can answer the question or not, the fact 
stands out as indisputable, that not merely the writers of 
the Epistles and G-ospels, and a few enthusiasts, but an im- 
mense multitude of all ages, of both sexes, and of every 
rank — the whole membership of the primitive churches — 
did believe in the death, resurrection, and glory of the Lord 
Jesus, and did render to him divine worship. The second 
great fact, affirmed in the Epistles, stands confirmed by the 
testimony of the heathen governor, and of the Roman em- 
peror. 

3. A mere theory of a new religion, unconnected with 
practice, may be easily received by those who care little 
about any, so long as it brings no suffering or inconvenience. 
But the religion of these Christians was, as you see, a prac- 
tical religion. If their new worship required a great de- 
parture from the worship of their childhood, their Christian 
morals required a still greater departure from their former 
mode of life. I need not remind you of the moral codes 
of Socrates, Plato, and Aristides, who taught that lying, 
thieving, adultery, and murder were lawful ; nor how much 
worse than the theory of the best of the heathen were the 
lives of the worst; nor how unpopular to persons so edu- 
cated would be such teaching as this — "Forasmuch then 
* as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh,., arm yourselves 
also with the same mind : for he that hath suffered in the 
flesh hath ceased from sin : that he no longer should live 
the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to 
the will of Grod. For the time past of our life may suffice 
us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we 
walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revelings, 
banquetings, and abominable idolatries ; wherein they think 



t 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



183 



it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of 
riot, speaking evil of you: who shall give account to him 
that is ready to judge the living and the dead." "Lay 
aside all malice, and guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and 
all evil speakings." "Whosoever abideth in Christ sinneth 
not. Whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known 
him. Little children, let no man deceive you. He that 
doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 
He that committeth sin is of the devil." So sharp, and 
stern, and strictly virtuous is apostolic religion, as displayed 
in these letters. Is it possible then that these converted 
heathens did really even approach this standard of morality? 
Did this gospel of Christ actually produce any such refor- 
mation of their lives? 

You have the testimony of apostates, eager to save their 
lives by giving such information as they knew would be 
acceptable to the persecutor ; you have the testimony of the 
two aged deaconesses, under torture ; you have the unwill- 
ing, but yet express, testimony of their torturer and mur- 
derer, that all his cruel ingenuity could discover nothing 
worse than an excessive superstition and culpable obstinacy. 
What, then, does this philosophic inspector of entrails, and 
adorer of idols, call an excessive superstition and culpable 
obstinacy? Why, they bound themselves by the most solemn 
religious services, not to be guilty of theft, robbery, or 
adultery; not to falsify their word, nor deny a pledge com- 
mitted to them; and when some senseless blocks of brass 
were carried on men's shoulders, into the court-house, to 
represent a mortal man, they would not adore them, nor 
pray to them ; no, not though this philosopher compiled the 
liturgy, and set the example. For this refusal, and this 
alone, he ordered them away to death. Doubtless they 
heard, in their hearts, the well-known words, " Let none of 
you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evil-doer, or 
as a busybody in other men's matters. But if any man 



184 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him 
glorify God on this behalf." 

The morality of the Epistles, then, was not a merely a 
fine theory, but an actual rule of life. The moral codes of 
the apostles were received as actually binding on the mem- 
bers of the churches of the first century. In this all-im- 
portant matter of the rule of a good life — the fruits by 
which the tree is known — the integrity, authority, and suc- 
cess of the apostles, in turning licentious heathens into moral 
Christians, is authenticated by the unwilling testimony of 
their persecutors. The Epistles of the apostles stand con- 
firmed, as to their ethics, by the letters of Trajan and Pliny. 

4. The only other fact to which I call your attention, 
from among the multitude alluded to in these letters, is the 
cost at which these converts from heathenism embraced this 
new religion. Every one who renounced heathenism, and 
professed the name of Christ, knew very well that he must 
suffer for it. " Beloved, think it not strange concerning the 
fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing 
happened unto you, but rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers 
of Christ's sufferings, that when his glory shall be revealed, 
ye may be glad with exceeding joy ; " this was the welcome 
of the Bithynian convert into the Church of Christ. Per- 
secution by fire and sword was then the common lot of the 
Church. ''I have never been present at any trials of the 
Christians," says the governor. Such trials were well known 
to him it seems. He was not sure whether he should mur- 
der all who ever had borne the name of Christ, or only those 
who proved themselves to be really his disciples, by refusing 
to revile him, and return to idolatry; and the merciful em- 
peror commands him to spare the apostates. Above twenty 
years before — in A. D. 86 — there were apostates from the 
persecuted religion. In A. D. 90, John had written, " they 
went out from us, that it might be made manifest they were 
not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



185 



have continued with us; but they went out that it might 
be made manifest that they were not all of us." So it seems 
Pliny thought: "They all worshiped your image, and other 
statues of the gods; these also reviled Christ. None of 
which things, as is said, they who are really Christians can 
by any means be compelled to do." What these means were 
he tells us : "I put the question to them, whether they were 
Christians. Upon their confessing to me that they were, I 
repeated the question a second and a third time, threaten- 
ing, also, to punish them with death. Such as still per- 
sisted, I ordered away to be punished." What is very re- 
markable, it was, it seems, "usual in such cases, for the 
crime to spread itself, even whilst under persecution." In 
the face of such dangers, these heathen would still profess 
faith in Christ, and when they might have saved their lives 
by reviling him, refused to do so. From the published re- 
script of the emperor, approving of Pliny's course, and con- 
demning to death all who were convicted of being really 
Christians; from the public circulars of the apostles, warn- 
ing them of " fiery trials," "Satan casting some of them 
into prison," and exhorting them to " be faithful unto death ;" 
and from such comments on these as the torture and public 
execution of aged women as well as men — the terms of dis- 
cipleship were well known to the whole world. Yet we see 
that in the face of all this, "great numbers of persons, of 
both sexes, and of all ages, and of every rank," in Pliny's 
opinion, were so steadfast in their faith, that " they were in 
great danger of suffering." 

Here, then, is another well-attested fact, in which the 
testimony of the apostles stands confirmed by the signature.! 
of the Bithynian governor, and the Roman emperor — a fact 
which stands forth clear, prominent, most undoubted, with- 
out the smallest trace of anything mythological or misty 
about it — that, in A. D. 106, great numbers of converted 
heathens did suffer exile, torture, and death itself, rather 



186 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



than renounce Christ; and that it was well known that the 
Christian faith enabled its professor to overcome the world. 

These four great facts of the later Epistles, being thus 
established beyond dispute, in pursuance of our plan, we 
ascend the stream of history some forty years, to the time 
of the earlier Epistles, when Paul lay in the Praetorian 
prison, and his faithful companion, Luke, wrote the con- 
tinuation of his narrative of the things most surely believed 
among the Christians; when "apostles were made as the 
filth of the world, and the offscouring of all things;" and 
Christians " were made a gazing stock both by reproaches and 
afflictions;" "were brought before kings and rulers, and hated 
of all nations for Christ's name sake ; " "endured a great 
fight of afflictions;" were "for his sake killed all the day 
long, and accounted as sheep for the slaughter;" " were made 
a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men." We remove 
the field of our investigation from a remote province of 
Asia, to one equally remote from Judea, and far more un- 
favorable for the growth of the religion of a crucified Jew, 
to the proud capital of the world, imperial Rome. The time 
shall be shortly after the burning of the city, in A. D. 64, 
and during the raging of the first of those systematic, im- 
perial, and savage persecutions through which the Church 
of Christ waded, in the bloody footsteps of her Lord, to 
world-wide influence, and undying fame. Our historian 
shall be the well-known Tacitus ; and the single extract from 
his history, one of which the infidel Gibbon says:* "The 
most skeptical criticism is obliged to respect the truth of 
this important fact, and the integrity of this celebrated pas- 
sage of Tacitus." I shall not insert quotations from Paul 
or Luke; that were merely to transcribe large portions of 
the Epistles and Grospels, which whoever will not carefully 
peruse, disqualifies himself for forming a judgment of their 

* Decline and Fall, Vol. II. page 407, 



IS THE GOSPEL PACT OR FABLE ? 



187 



veracity. The confirmation of the four facts already es- 
tablished, of the existence, worship, morals, and sufferings 
of the disciples of Christ; and these facts as well known 
within thirty years after his death, will sufficiently appear 
by the perusal of the following testimony of Tacitus.* 

After relating the burning of the city, and Nero's attempt 
to transfer the odium of it to the sect " commonly known 
by the name of Christians," he says: 

" The author of that name was Christ, who, in the reign of Ti- 
berius, was put to death as a criminal, under the procurator, Pon- 
tius Pilate. But this pestilent superstition, checked for a while, 
broke out afresh, and spread not only over Judea, where the evil 
originated, but also -in Eome, where all that is evil on the earth 
finds its way, and is practiced. At first, those only were appre- 
hended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterward, a vast 
multitude discovered by them; all of whom were condemned, not 
so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to 
mankind. Their executions were so contrived, as to expose them 
to derision and contempt. Some were covered over with the skins 
of wild beasts, that they might be torn to pieces by dogs ; some 
were crucified ; while others, having been daubed over with com- 
bustible materials, were set up for lights in the night time, and thus 
burned to death. For these spectacles Nero gave his own gardens, 
and, at the same time, exhibited there the diversions of the circus; 
sometimes standing in the crowd as a spectator, in the habit of a 
charioteer; and, at other times, driving a chariot himself; until at 
length these men, though really criminal, and deserving of exem- 
plary punishment, began to be commiserated, -as people who were 
destroyed, not out of regard to the public welfare, but only to grat- 
ify the cruelty of one man." 

We add no comment on this remarkable passage. Take 
up your New Testament and read the contemporary history 
— Acts xxii. to the end of the book — and the letters of Paul 
from Jlonie, to Philemon, Titus, the Ephesians, Philippians, 
Colossians, and the Second to Timothy, written when the 
aged prisoner was ready to be offered, and the time of his 



* Lib. XV. chap. 44. 



188 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



departure, amidst such scenes and sufferings, was at hand. 
Then form your own opinion as to the origin and nature of 
that faith in Jesus which enabled him to say: "None of 
these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto me, 
that I may finish my course with joy, and the testimony 
which I have received of the Lord Jesus." "I know in 
whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to 
keep that which I have committed to him against that day." 

Whatever may be your opinion of the apostle's hope for 
the future, you must acknowledge that we have ascertained, 
beyond contradiction, these four facts of the past: 

1. That without the power of force, or the help of gov- 
ernments, and in spite of them, the apostles did convert vast 
multitudes of idolaters from a senseless worship of stocks and 
stones, to the worship of the one living and true Grod; a 
thing never done by the preachers of any other religion be- 
fore or since. 

2. That without the help of power or civil law, and solely 
by moral and spiritual means, they did persuade multitudes 
of licentious heathens to give up their vices, and obey the 
pure precepts of the morality contained in their Epistles; 
a thing never done by the preachers of any other religion 
before or since. 

3. That these converts were so firmly persuaded of the 
truth of their new religion, that, with the choice of life and 
worldly honor, or a death of infamy and torture before them, 
multitudes deliberately chose to suffer torture and death 
rather than renounce the belief in one Grod, obedience to his 
laws, and the hope of eternal life through Jesus Christ, which 
they had learned from the sermons and letters of these 
apostles ; a thing never done by the professors of any other 
religion before or since.* 

* The sufferings of the Jews, under Antiochus, are no exception. 
They suffered for their faith in the true God, the Messiah to come, 
and a resurrection to life eternal. 



IS THE GOSPEL FACT OR FABLE ? 



189 



4. The faith which produced such an illumination of their 
minds ; which caused such a blessed change in their lives ; 
which filled them with joy and hope, and enabled them even 
to despise torture and death, was briefly this : " That Christ 
died for our sins, according to the Scriptures ; and that he was 
buried, and that he rose again on the third day, according 
to the Scriptures ; that he ascended up into heaven, and 
will come again to judge the world, and reward every man 
according to his works ; and that whosoever believes these 
things in his heart, and confesses them with his mouth, shall 
be saved; and he that believeth them not shall be damned." 

It is a fact, then, indisputably proven by history, that the 
New Testament does teach a religion which can enlighten 
men's minds, reform their lives, give peace to their con- 
sciences, and enable them to meet death with a joyful hope 
of life eternal. It has done these things in times past, and 
is doing them now. These are its undoubted fruits. Reader, 
this faith may be yours. It will work the same results in 
you as it has done in others. Like causes ever produce like 
effects. Jesus waits to deliver you from your sins, to fill 
you with joy and peace in believing, and make you abound 
in hope, by the power of the Holy Grhost. He has prom- 
ised, if you will ask it, "I will give them a heart to know 
me, that I am the Lord." 



CHAPTER VII. 



JDan JJe Relieve Phrist J^ujd jiis 

yfeFOSTLES? 

" That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, 
which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and 
our hands have handled of the Word of life * * * that which 
we have seen and heard declare we unto you." — 1 John i. I. 



We have seen that the companions of Jesus wrote the 
books of the New Testament; that their statements of the 
existence, worship, morals, and faith of the Christian Church 
are confirmed by their enemies, and that multitudes of 
heathens were turned from vice to virtue by the belief of 
the testimony of these men, They testified that Jesus 
Christ did many wonderful miracles, died for our sins, and 
rose again from the dead ; that they saw, and felt his body, 
and ate, and drank, and conversed with him for forty days 
after his resurrection; that he ascended up to heaven in 
their sight ; that he sent them to tell the world that he will 
come again in the clouds of heaven, with his mighty angels, 
to judge the living and the dead; that he who believes 
these things and is baptized shall be saved, but he that be- 
lieveth not shall be damned. This is their statement. The 
question is, Can we believe them ? 

1. The first thing which strikes us in their testimony is, 
that it stands out utterly different from all other religions. 
There is nothing in the world like it, not even its counter- 
feits. The great central fact of Christianity — that Christ 

(190) 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND IIIS APOSTLES ? 191 



died for our sins, and rose again from the dead — stands ab- 
solutely alone in the history of religions. The priests of 
Baal, Brahma, or Jupiter, never dreamed of such a thing. 
The prophets of Mohammedanism, Mormonism, or Panthe- 
ism, have never attempted to imitate it. The great object 
of all counterfeit Christianity is to deny it. 

There is no instance in the whole world's history of any 
other religion ever producing the same effects. We demand 
an instance of men destitute of wealth, arms, power, and 
learning, converting multitudes of lying, lustful, murdering 
idolaters, into honest, peaceable, virtuous men simply by 
prayer and preaching. When the Infidel tells us of the 
rapid spread of Mohammedanism and Mormonism — impos- 
tures which enlist disciples by promising free license to lust, 
robbery, and murder, and retain them by the terror of the 
scimeter and the rifle ball ; which reduce mankind to the 
most abject servitude, and womanhood to the most debasing 
concubinage ; which have turned the fairest regions of the 
earth to a wilderness, and under whose blighting influence 
commerce, arts, science, industry, comfort, and the human 
race itself, have withered away — he simply insults our com- 
mon sense, by ignoring the difference between backgoing 
vice and ongoing virtue ; or acknowledges that he knows as 
little about Mohammedanism, as he does about Christianity. 
The gospel stands alone in its doctrines, singular in its oper- 
ation, unequaled in its success. 

2. The next important point for consideration is, that the 
Christianity preached by Christ and his apostles is a whole 
— a single system, which we must either take or leave — be- 
lieve entirely, or entirely reject it as an imposture. There 
is no middle ground for you to occupy. It is all true, or 
all false. For instance, you can not take one of Paul's 
Epistles and say, "this is true," and take another of the 
same man's letters, containing the very same religion, and 
say, u this is false. If you accept the very briefest of Paul's 



192 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES? 



Letters, that to Philemon, containing only thirteen sentences 
on private business, you accept eleven distinct assertions of 
the authority, grace, love, and divinity of our Lord. Nor 
can you say you will accept Peter's Letters and reject 
Paul's ; for you will find the very same facts asserted by 
the one as by the other; and moreover, Peter indorses "all 
the epistles of our beloved brother Paul" as on the same 
pedestal of authority with the other Scriptures. You can 
not say, "I will accept the letters and reject the history," 
for the letters have no meaning without the history. They 
are founded upon it, and assume or allege its facts on every 
page. Were the gospels lost, we could collect a good ac- 
count of the birth, teaching, death, resurrection, ascension, 
and almighty power of the Lord Christ from Paul's Epis- 
tles; and these letters are just as confident in alleging the 
miraculous part of the history as the gospels themselves. 
Neither can you gain any advantage by saying, "I accept 
the gospels, but reject the letters," for there is not a doc- 
trine of the New Testament which is not taught in the very 
first of them, the Gospel by Matthew. Further, the gospels 
contain the most solemn authentication of the commissions 
of the apostles, so that whoever rejects their teaching, 
brings upon himself guilt equal to that of rejecting Christ 
himself. "Lo, I am with you alway" — "He that receiveth 
you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me, receiveth him 
that sent me" — "Whosoever will not receive you, nor hear 
your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake 
off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, it shall 
be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in 
the day of judgment, than for that city." 

It is, if possible, more absurd to attempt to dissect the 
morality of the gospel from its history, and to say, " We are 
willing to receive the Christian code of morals as a very ex- 
cellent rule of life, and to regard Jesus as a rare example of 
almost superhuman virtue, but we must consider the narra- 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 193 

tive of supernatural events interwoven with it as mytholog- 
ical," i. e. 3 false. Which is much the same as to say, "We 
will be very happy to receive your friend if he will only cut 
his head off." Of what possible use would the Christian 
code of morals be without the authority of Christ, the law- 
giver? If he possessed no divine authority, what right has 
he to control your inclination or mine? And if he will 
never return to inquire whether men obey or disobey his 
law, who will regard it? Do you suppose the world will be 
turned upside down, and reformed, by a little good advice? 
Nay, verily, the world has had trial of that vanity long 
enough. "We must all appear before the judgment seat 
of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in 
the body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good 
or bad. Knowing, therefore, the terrors of the Lord, we 
persuade men." 

Take away the miraculous and supernatural from the gos- 
pel history, and there is nothing left for you to accept. 
There is no political economy nor worldly morality in it. It 
is wholly the history of a supernatural person, and every 
precept of his morality comes with a divine sanction. Fur- 
ther, -you know nothing of either his life or his morality but 
from the gospel history, and if the record of the miracles 
which occupy three -fourths of the gospels be false, what 
reason have you to give any credit to the remainder? For, 
as the German commentator, De Wette, well says, "The 
only means of acquaintance with a history is the narrative 
we possess concerning it, and beyond that narrative the in- 
terpreter can not go. In these Bible records, the narrative 
reports to us only a supernatural course of events, which 
we must either receive or reject. If we reject the narra- 
tive, we know nothing at all about the event, and we are 
not justified in allowing ourselves to invent a natural course 
of events of which the narrative is totally silent." So, you 
13 



194 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 



see, you can not make a Christ to suit your taste, but must 
just take the Christ of the gospel, or reject him. 

If you reject the testimony of Christ and his apostles as 
false, and say you can not believe them in matters of fact, 
how can you respect their morality? Of all the absurdities 
of modern Infidelity, the respectful language generally used 
by its advocates in speaking of Christ and his apostles is 
the most inconsistent. He claimed to be a Divine Person, 
and professed to work miracles. The Infidel says he was 
not a Divine Person, and wrought no miracles. The conse- 
quence is unavoidable — such a pretender is a blasphemous 
impostor. And yet they speak of him as a " model man," 
an " exemplar of every virtue." What ! an impostor a model 
man? A blasphemer and liar an exemplar of every virtue? 
Is that the Infidel's notion of virtue? Why, the devils were 
more consistent in their commendations of his character," We 
know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God." Let our 
modern enemies of Christ learn consistency from their an- 
cient allies. We have also learned from our Master to refuse 
all hypocritical, half-way professions of respect for his char- 
acter and teachings from those whose business is to prove him 
a deceiver, and whose object in speaking respectfully of such 
a One can only be to gain a larger audience, and a readier 
entrance for their blasphemy among his professed disciples. 
From every man who professes respect for Christ's character, 
and for the morality which he and his apostles taught, we 
demand a straightforward answer to the questions : "When 
he declared himself the Son of God, the Judge of the living 
and the dead, did he tell the truth, or did he lie? When he 
promised to attest his divine commission by rising from the 
dead on the third day, had he any such power, or did he 
only mean to play a juggling imposture? Is Jesus the 
Christ the Son of the Living God, or a deceiver?" There 
is no middle ground. He that is not with him is against 
him. 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 195 



The case is just the same with regard to the witnesses of 
his miracles, death, and resurrection. They either give a 
true relation of these things, or they have manufactured a 
series of falsehoods. How can we believe anything from 
persons so habituated to lying as the narrators of the mighty 
works of Jesus must be, if those mighty works never were 
performed? How can we accept their code of morals if we 
refuse to believe them when they speak of matters of fact? 
Is it possible to respect men as moral teachers, whom we 
have convicted of forging stories of miracles that never oc- 
curred, and confederating together to impose a lying super- 
stition on the world? For this is plainly the very point and 
center of the question about the truth of the Bible, and I 
am anxious you should see it clearly. A fair statement of 
this question is half the argument. The question then is 
simply this, Was Jesus really the Divine Person he claimed 
to be, or was he a blasphemous impostor? When the apos- 
tles unitedly and solemnly testified that they had seen him 
after he was risen from the dead, that they ate and drank 
with him, that their hands had handled his body, that they 
conversed with him for forty days, and that they saw him 
go up to heaven, did they tell the truth or were they a con- 
federated band of liars? There is no reason for any other 
supposition. They could not possibly be deceived them- 
selves in the matters they relate. They knew perfectly 
whether they were true or not. We are not talking about 
matters of dogma, about which there might be room for 
difference of opinion, but about matters of fact — about 
what men say they saw, and heard, and felt — about which 
no man of common sense could possibly be mistaken. " That 
which we have seen with our eyes, which we have heard, 
which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of 
the Word of life * * * that which we have ^een and 
heard declare we unto you." Such is their language. We 
must either take it as truth, or reject it as falsehood. It is 



196 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 



utter nonsense to talk of the intense subjectivity of the 
Jewish mind, and the belief of the apostles that the Mes- 
siah would do wonders when he came, and the powerful im- 
pressions produced by the teaching of Jesus on their minds. 
We are not talking about impressions on their minds, but 
about impressions produced on their eyes, and ears, and 
hands. Did these men tell the truth when they told the 
world that they did eat and drink with Jesus after he rose 
from the dead, or did they lie? That is the question. 

3. It is a hard matter to lie well. A liar has need of a 
good memory, else he will contradict himself before he 
writes far. And he needs to be very well posted up in the 
matters of names, dates, places, manners and customs, else 
he will contradict some well-known facts, and so expose his 
forgery to the world. Therefore writers of forgeries avoid 
all such things as much as possible, and as surely as they 
venture on specifications of that sort they are detected. 
A man who is conscious of writing a book of falsehoods 
does not begin on this wise: "Now in the fifteenth year of 
the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor 
of Judea, and Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee, and his 
brother Philip Tetrarch of Iturea and of the regions of 
Trachonitis, and Lysanias Tetrarch of Abilene, Annas and 
Caiphas being high priests, the Word of God came unto 
John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness." Here in 
one sentence are twenty historical, geographical, political, 
and genealogical references, every one of which we can con- 
firm by references to secular historians. The enemies of 
the Lord have utterly failed in their attempts to disprove 
one out of the hundreds of such statements in the New 
Testament. The only instance of any public political event 
recorded in the gospel, said not to be confirmed by the frag- 
ments of secular history we possess, is Luke's account of a 
census of the Roman Empire, ordered by Augustus Caesar. 
Were it so that Luke stood alone in his mention of this, 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 197 



surely his credit as a historian would be as good for this 
fact, as the credit of Tacitus, when he states matters of 
which Suetonius makes no mention, or of Pliny, when he 
relates things not recorded by Tacitus. But we can account 
for the want of corroborative history in this instance, when 
we know that all the history of Dion Cassius, from the con- 
sulships of Antistius and Balbus to those of Messala and 
China — that is, for five years before and five years after the 
birth of Christ — is lost; as also Livy's history of the same 
period. It is certain that some one did record the fact, for 
Suidas, in his lexicon upon the word apographc, says, " that 
Augustus sent twenty select men into all the provinces of 
the empire to take a census, both of men and property, and 
commanded that a just proportion of the latter should be 
brought into the imperial treasury. And this was the first 
census." 

To object to the gospel history, that everything contained 
in it of the doings of Christ and his apostles in Judea, is 
not recorded by the historians of Greece and Italy, is much 
the same as to say that there are a multitude of facts re- 
corded in D'Aubigne's History of the Reformation in Ger- 
many, of which Hume and Macaulay make no mention in 
their histories of England. How should they? — treating of 
different countries, and for the most part of different per- 
iods, and writing civil and not church history? Does any- 
body go to Macaulay to look for the history of the West- 
minster Assembly, or to Bancroft for an account of the 
Great Revival in New England? Or is the veracity of 
Baillie, or Edwards suspected, because political history does 
not concern itself much about religion ? It is enough that 
not a single statement of the gospel history has ever been 
disproved. 

I might give you quotations from the enemies of the 
Christian faith, from Josephus the Jew, and Celsus, and 
Porphyry, heathen philosophers, and from the Emperor 



198 CAN "WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 



Julian, the apostate — who, having been raised a Christian, 
became a heathen, and used all his ingenuity to overturn the 
religion of Christ — expressly admitting the principal mira- 
cles recorded in the gospel. But I attach no such impor- 
tance to the testimony of this class of persons as to sup- 
pose that it should be placed, for one moment, on a level 
with the testimony of the apostles, or that their testimony 
to the facts of the life and death of Christ needs any con- 
firmation from such witnesses. TVe have such overwhelm- 
ing evidence of the sincerity and truth of the witnesses 
chosen by G-od to bear testimony to the resurrection of 
Christ, as we never can have of the credibility of any secu- 
lar historian whatever. 

You will remember that these are the writers whose ac- 
counts of the existence, the faith and worship, the numbers 
and morals of the Christian Church, we have seen so strik- 
ingly confirmed by their enemies : and we now inquire. Can 
we believe the other part of their history to be as true? 
These are the men who taught the heathen a pure Christian 
morality, one principal article of which was, " Lie not one 
to another, seeing ye have put off the old man with his 
deeds" — ••All liars shall have their portion in the lake that 
burneth with fire and brimstone " — and we are to inquire if 
they themselves lied ; lied publicly, lied repeatedly, if the 
very business of their lives was to propagate falsehood, and 
if they died with a lie in their right hands. You will re- 
member that we proved conclusively that the belief o£ the 
death and resurrection of J esus did turn immense multi- 
tudes of wicked men to a life of virtue, and now we are to 
inquire if the belief of a lie produced this blessed result, 
and whether, if so, there be any such thing as truth in the 
world, or any use in it ? 

4. Of no other series of events of ancient history do we 
possess the same number of records by contemporary his- 
torians, as of the life, death, and resurrection of the Lord 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 



199 



Jesus. We have four direct systematic memoirs of him 
by four of his companions ; and we have a collection of let- 
ters by four others, in which the events of the memoirs are 
continually referred to. At the mouth of two or three 
witnesses any man's property and life will be disposed of in 
a court of justice, but here we have the testimony of eight 
eye-witnesses of the facts they relate, and they refer to five 
hundred other persons, the greater part of whom were then 
alive, who had also seen and heard Christ after his resur- 
rection. These eight persons give us their separate and 
independent statements of those things they deemed worthy 
of record in the life and death of Christ, and of the say- 
ings and doings of several of his friends and enemies. Now 
every person knows that it is impossible to make two crooked 
boughs tally, or two false witnesses agree. You never saw 
two lying reports of any considerable number of transac- 
tions agree, unless the one was copied from the other. 

It is evident that the gospels were not copied from each 
other, for they often relate different events, and when they 
relate the same occurrence, each man relates those parts of 
it which he saw himself, and which impressed him most. 
Yet the utmost ingenuity of infidelity has utterly failed to 
make them contradict each other in any particular. Here 
are eight witnesses to the truth of the same story, four of 
whom in their letters make occasional allusions to the facts 
of the history as being perfectly well known, and therefore 
needing only to be alluded to, yet these cursory references 
fit into the history with every mark of truthfulness. Does 
the history of Matthew, written at Jerusalem, tell us that 
Jesus took Peter, and James, and John up into a high 
mountain apart, and was transfigured before them ? Peter, 
in his letter, written from Babylon, says, " We were eye- 
witnesses of his majesty. We were with him in the holy 
mount." — 2 Peter ii. 10. If the history tells how Paul 
was beaten and cast into prison at Philippi, and his feet 



200 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 



made fast in the stocks, and that, nevertheless, he manfully 
defended his birthright as a Roman citizen, and made the 
tyrannical magistrates humble themselves, and apologize for 
their illegal conduct, we find Paul himself, in a letter to a 
neighboring church, appealing to their knowledge of the 
facts, " that after we had suffered before, and were shame- 
fully entreated, as ye know, at Philippi, we were bold in our 
God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much con- 
tention. For our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of un- 
cleanness, nor in guile. For neither at any time used we 
flattering words, as ye know, nor a cloak for covetousness." 
— 1 Thessalonians ii. 2. Hundreds of such undesigned 
coincidences may be found in the New Testament, confirm- 
ing the veracity of the several historians and letter writers, 
and giving that impression of the naturalness and truth of 
the story, which can neither be described nor disputed. The 
reader who desires to prosecute this interesting branch of 
the evidences of Christianity will find an ample collection 
of these coincidences in Paley's Horae Paulinse. 

This agreement of independent writers is the more re- 
markable, as the writers were persons of very various degrees 
of education, of different professions and ranks of life, born 
in different countries, and writing from various places in 
Italy, Greece, Palestine, and Assyria, without any commu- 
nication with each other. Matthew was an officer of cus- 
toms in Galilee ; Mark a Hebrew citizen of Jerusalem ; 
Luke a Greek physician of Antioch; James and John 
owned and sailed a fishing smack on Lake Tiberias ; Jude 
left his thirty-nine acres of land, worth nine thousand de- 
narii, to be farmed by his children when he went forth to 
preach the gospel ; and college-bred Paul carried his sturdy 
independence in his breast, and his sail needles in his pocket, 
and dictated epistles, and cut out marquees and lug-sails in 
the tent factory of Aquila, Paul & Co., at Corinth. Sever- 
al of his letters were written in a dungeon in Rome ; the 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 201 

last of Pater's is dated at Babylon ; Matthew's G-ospel was 
penned at Jerusalem, and John's G-ospel and Epistles were 
written at Ephesus. The agreement of eight such wit- 
nesses, of such different pursuits, and so scattered over the 
world, in the relation of the same story, in all its leading 
particulars, together with their variety of style and manner, 
and their various relations of minor incidents, yet without 
a single contradiction, are most convincing proofs that they 
all tell truth. Nothing but truth could be thus told with- 
out contradiction. 

The fact that some considerable difficulties and many mi- 
nor obscurities in these brief though pregnant narratives, 
prevent the combination of eight accounts so independent 
in their sources, and various in their style, and design, and 
auditors, into a flowing historical novel, a homogeneous 
mass, rounded and squared to our ideas of mathematical 
precision, is only an additional proof of their truth to na- 
ture, which abhors mathematical, as much as truth does 
rhetorical figures. Like the variety of expression used by 
American, German, French, and Polish witnesses in our 
courts of justice, testifying the same facts in their native 
idioms, though in English words, the apparent discrepancy, 
but actual harmony, becomes the most decisive test of the 
absence of any collusion, and consequently of the verity of 
the facts which such various witnesses unite in testifying. 
Especially will any such apparent discrepancy resolve itself 
into our own unskillfulness or ignorance, when we remem- 
ber that the mists of ages, and the drapery of a strange 
language, and world-wide removal of residence, and the 
turning of the world upside down by the progress of Chris- 
tian civilization, and our consequent ignorance of the thou- 
sand little details of every-day life, well known to the 
writer and his immediate readers, and of the force of ex- 
pressive idioms, perfectly familiar to them — have rendered 
us not near so capable of detecting inaccuracies, as those 



/ 



202 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 



contemporary writers and opponents, who allowed them — 
if they existed — to pass unchallenged. Like those antique 
coins, whose rust-dimmed and abbreviated inscriptions ex- 
ercise the patience and historic lore of the antiquarian, 
though neither, are needed to declare the precious material, 
this very rust of antiquity, through which his patience has 
penetrated, becomes one of the inimitable marks of historic 
verity. Every year throws some new light on texts diffi- 
cult to us from our ignorance of those manners, customs, 
names, and places, which Infidel malice and Christian piety 
have combined to explore ; and from the ruins of Nineveh 
and the sepulchers of Egypt we receive unlooked-for testi- 
monies to the minute accuracy of the penmen of the Bible. 

5. The manner in which the apostles published their tes- 
timony to the world bears every mark of truthfulness. 
Deception and forgery skulk, and try to spread themselves 
at first in holes and corners, but he that doeth truth cometh 
to the light. Had the apostles been conscious of falsehood, 
would they have dared to assert that J esus was risen from 
the dead in the very streets of the city where he was cruci- 
fied? in the temple, the most public place of resort of the 
Jews who saw him crucified ? and to the teeth of the very 
men who put him to death? If conscious of falsehood, 
would they have dared, before the chief priests, and the 
council, and all the senate of Israel, to assert that "The 
God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and 
hanged on a tree. Him hath Grod exalted with his right 
hand to be a Prince and a Savior, to give repentance to 
Israel, and remission of sins. And we are his witnesses of 
these things, and so is also the Holy Grhost which Grod hath 
given to them that obey him." — Acts v. 30. "Would Paul, 
had he been conscious that he was relating falsehood, have 
dared to appeal to the judge, before whom he was on trial 
for his life, as to one who knew the notoriety of these facts, 
" For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 203 

I speak freely ; for I am persuaded that none of these things 
are hidden from him : for this thing was not done in a cor- 
ner." — Acts xxvi. 26. Would such appeals have been suf- 
fered to pass uncontradicted had the statements of the 
apostles been false ? 

The boldness of their manner, however, of telling their 
story, is little, compared with the boldness of the design 
which they had in view in telling it; which was nothing 
less than to convert the world. Now the idea of proselyt- 
ing other nations to a new religion was absolutely unknown 
to the world at that time. The Greeks and Romans never 
dreamed of any such thing. They would sometimes add a 
new god to their old Pantheon, but the idea of turning a 
nation to the worship of new deities was never before heard 
of. The Jews were so indignant at the project, that when 
Paul hinted it to them, they cried, "Away with such a fel- 
low from the earth, for it is not fit that he should live." 
And this new and strange idea, of conquering the world for 
a crucified man, is taken up by a few private citizens, who 
resolve to overturn the craft by which priests have their 
wealth, and to bring the kingdoms of the world to become 
the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ. 

Impostors would never have appealed to their power of 
working miracles as the apostles did ; nor could enthusiasts 
have done so without instant exposure. It is remarkable, 
that while in addressing those who believed their divine 
commission, they rarely allude to it (fourteen of the epis- 
tles make no allusion to apostolic miracles), but dwell on a 
subject of far greater importance — a holy life — they never 
hesitate to confront a Simon Magus, or a schismatical church 
at Corinth, or a persecuting high priest and sanhedrim with 
this power of the Holy Ghost. " Tongues," says Paul, "are 
for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe 
not;" and this is true of all other miracles. This marks 
the difference between real miracles and those of pretend- 



204 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 

ers ; who have never attempted to establish a new religion 
by them, or to convert unbelievers hostile to their claims 
and able to examine them, without immediate exposure. 
But you never heard of an impostor standing up before the 
tribunal of his judges and alleging the miraculous cure of 
a well-known public beggar, lame from his mother's womb, 
whom they had seen at the church gate every Sabbath for 
forty years, and bringing the man into court after such a 
fashion as this, " If we this day be examined of the good 
deed done unto the impotent man, by what means he is 
made whole, be it known unto you all, and to all the people 
of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, 
whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even 
by him doth this man stand before you whole." Such an 
appeal was unanswerable. "Beholding the man that was 
healed standing with them, they could say nothing against 
it." Nay, they were compelled to acknowledge "that in- 
deed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest 
to all them that dwell in Jerusalem — we can not deny it." — 
Acts iv. 

The denial of the miracles of the gospel is a modern in- 
vention of the enemy. The scribes, and priests, emperors, 
and philosophers of the first centuries, who had the best 
opportunity of proving their falsehood, were unable to do 
so. The persecutors and apostates, whose malice against 
the Church knew no bounds, never dared to utter a charge 
of deception against the apostles. Why, then, you ask, did 
they not all become Christians? Because miracles can not 
convert any man against his will. Christianity is not merely 
a belief in miracles, but the love of Christ, and a life of 
holiness. There are many readers of this book who would 
not turn from their sins if all the dead in Spring Grove 
Cemetery would rise to-morrow to warn them from hell. 
God does not intend to force any man to become a Christian. 
He just gives evidence enough to try you, whether you will 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 205 



deal honestly and fairly with your own soul and your God, 
and if you are determined to hate Christ and his holy re- 
ligion, you shall never want a plausible excuse for unbelief ; 
as it is written, " Unto them which are disobedient, Christ 
is a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense." These 
ancient enemies of Christ acknowledged the reality of his 
miracles, but attributed them to magical power, or the help 
of Satan. The Jews said that he had acquired the power 
of miracles by learning to pronounce the incommunicable 
name of God. Modern Infidels deny all his miracles save 
the greatest — the turning of men from their sins. They 
can not deny that; they can not ascribe it to the power of 
Satan or of magic, for they do not believe in either; but 
they follow as nearly in the footsteps of their fathers as 
possible, when they tell us that multitudes of men, in every 
age, and in every land, have been turned from falsehood to 
truth by the belief of a lie, and from vice to virtue by the 
example of an impostor ! 

6. But the strongest proof of the truth of the facts of 
the gospel is the existence, the labors and sufferings of the 
apostles themselves. Nobody denies that such men lived, 
and preached, and were persecuted on account of their 
preaching that Jesus died and rose again. Now, if this 
was a falsehood, what motive had they to tell it? It was 
very displeasing to their rulers who had crucified him, and 
who had every inclination to give them the same treatment. 
To preach another king, one Jesus, to the Romans, was to 
bring down the power of the empire upon them. Nothing 
could be more absurd in the eyes of the Grecian philoso- 
phers than to speak of the resurrection of the body. Nor 
could any plan be devised more certain to arouse the fury 
of the pagan priesthood, than to denounce the craft by 
which they had their wealth, and to preach that they are no 
gods which are made by hands. The most degraded wretch, 
who perishes by the hand of the hangman is not so con- 



206 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 



temptible in our eyes, as the crucified malefactor was in the 
eyes of the Roman people ; nor could anything more disa- 
greeable to the Jewish nation be invented than the decla- 
ration, that the Gentiles should become partakers of the 
kingdom of God. What then should induce any man in 
his senses to provoke such an opposition to a new religion, 
and to make it so contemptible and disagreeable to those 
whom he sought to convert, if he were manufacturing a lie 
to gain power and popularity? 

The religion they preached was not adapted to please 
sensual men, nor to allow its preachers in sensual gratifica- 
tions. "Our exhortation," says Paul — and every reader of 
the New Testament knows that he says truth — " Our ex- 
hortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor of 
guile." Infidels admit that they preached a pure morality. 
But it is a long time since men learned the proverb, '-'Phy- 
sician, heal thyself." " Thou that preachest a man should 
not steal, dost thou steal ? Thou that sayest a man should 
not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? Thou 
that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?" It 
could not, then, be to obtain license for lust that these men 
preached holiness. 

There is only one other conceivable motive which should 
induce men to confederate together for the propagation of 
falsehood — the design of making money by it. But their 
new religion made no provision for any such tiling. One of 
their first acts was to desire the church to elect deacons 
who might manage its money matters, and allow them to 
give themselves wholly to prayer and to the ministry of the 
word. Twenty-five years after that they could appeal to 
the world that " Even to this present hour, we" (the Apos- 
tles) "both hunger and thirst, and are naked, and are buf- 
feted, and have no certain dwelling-place, and labor work- 
ing with our hands ; being reviled, we bless ; being perse- 
cuted, we suffer it: we are counted as the filth of the 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 207 



world, and the offscouring of all things to this day." Their 
book opens with the story of their Master's birth in a sta- 
ble, with the manger for his cradle, and one of its last pic- 
tures is that of his venerable apostle chained in a dungeon, 
and begging his friend to bring his old cloak from Troas, 
and to do his diligence to come before winter. 

Unpopular, pure, and penniless, if the gospel story were 
not true, how could it have had preachers? They at least 
believed it. 

The last and most convincing testimony which any man 
can give to the truth of a statement of fact is to suffer 
rather than deny it. Many have wondered why God al- 
lowed his dear servants to suffer so much persecution in the 
first ages of the Church. One principal reason was to give 
future ages an irresistible proof of the sincerity and faith- 
fulness of the witnesses for Christ. The apostles lived 
lives of persecution and suffering for the name of Jesus; 
sufferings which they might have avoided if they had only 
abstained from preaching any more in this name. But, said 
they, " We can not but speak of the things which we have 
seen and heard." One who had no personal acquaintance 
with Jesus, and whose first interview with him was while 
he was breathing out threatening and slaughter against the 
disciples of the Lord, is converted and called to be an apos- 
tle; and behold the prospect Jesus presents to him, "I will 
show him how great things he must suffer for my name." 
"The HolyGrhost testifieth," says Paul, "that in every city 
bonds and afflictions abide me. Yet none of these things 
move me." That at least was a true prophecy. "Seven 
times," says Clement, "he was in bonds, he was whipt, he 
was stoned ; he preached both in the East and West, leav- 
ing behind him the glorious report of his faith', and so hav- 
ing taught the whole world righteousness, and for that end 
traveled even to the utmost bounds of the W est, he at last 
suffered martyrdom by the command of t-ie governors, and 



208 CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 

went to his holy place, having become a most eminent pat- 
tern of patience to all ages."* Hear his own appeal to 
those who envied his authority in the church, "Are they 
ministers of Christ, I am more : in labors more abundant, 
in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths 
often. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save 
one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, 
thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been 
in the deep: in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in 
perils of robbers, in perils by my own countrymen, in perils 
by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilder- 
ness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in 
weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and 
thirst, in cold and nakedness.'" — 1 Corinthians ii. 23. 

3Ian can give no higher proof of his veracity, than a life 
such as this, unless it is to seal it with his blood ; and this 
crowning testimony to the truth the apostles gave. Save 
the aged disciple, who, after torments worse than death, 
survived to address the persecuted church as, " Your com- 
panion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of 
Jesus Christ." they all suffered martyrdom for the truth of 
the gospel history. 

Let me again remind you that the gospel is not a collec- 
tion of dogmas, but a relation of facts ; that these twelve 
men did not preach the death and resurrection of Jesus, 
because they had read them in a creed, but because they 
had seen them with their own eyes ; that they lived holy 
lives of toil, and hardship, and poverty, and suffering, in 
preaching these facts to the world; and that they died 
painful and shameful deaths as martyrs for their truth. You 
admit these things. Then I demand of you, " What more 
could either God or man do to convince you of their truth- 
fulness?" 



* Wake's Trans, of Clement, Ep. ad Cor. v. 



CAN WE BELIEVE CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES ? 209 

The faithful and true witness himself has given you this 
last, undeniable test of veracity. With the certainty of an 
ignominious death before him, he solemnly swears to the 
truth of this fact, and dies for it. "And the high priest 
answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living 
G-od, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son 
of Grod? Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said. Hereafter 
ye shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of 
power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." 

Unbeliever, are you prepared to meet him there, and 
prove him a perjured impostor? 

14 



CHAPTER VIII. 



f*6 



OPHECY, 



" In fifty years all Europe will be either Cossack, or Re- 
publican." So prophesied the most sagacious of modern 
politicians, by the inspiration of genius, calculating the 
prospects of the future by the light of his past experience. 
This prediction of Napoleon's is a very fair specimen of the 
oracles of human sagacity ; which always overlooks the most 
stupendous facts — such as the conversion of an empire — and 
the commonest experiences — such as the birth of a brace of 
conflicting twins from the womb of the Rachel of revolu- 
tion, when history happens to predict the failure of the 
self-elected conquering savior. Man learns to believe what- 
ever he fondly desires, to expect what he believes, and to 
predict what he expects. His predictions are the mirrors 
which photograph his own moods of mind, rather than views 
through a telescope directed to the distant cloud capped 
mountains of futurity. 

But it is confidently asserted that the science of party 
politics is simply the exercise of the gift of prophetic vis- 
ion on the theater of civil life ; and that a sagacious poli- 
tician is, within his own sphere, a prophet. He applies the 
conditions of the past, so far as he knows them, to the cal- 
culation of the future. His success proves his sagacity, not 
his supernatural inspiration. Why should religious predic- 
tions be attributed to a different power? 

For the very simple and satisfactory reason, that the 
great majority of the calculations of party politicians are 

(210) 



PROPHECY. 



211 



failures, while the predictions of the Bible are verified by 
the event. Name a dozen leaders of American politics 
during the last half century, and you name half a score of 
disappointed presidential candidates, whose unfinished mon- 
uments prevent the kindly green sward of oblivion from 
vailing their disappointments, and check the prayer of the 
passing pilgrim that they may rest in peace; while of the 
last half dozen who have occupied the presidential chair, 
and guided the destinies of the most progressive half of the 
world, not a single man had been suggested by the political 
leaders even ten }^ears before his election. No wonder poli- 
ticians become shy of prediction. 

But it is alleged, that while on a field so contracted as to 
become the arena of mere personal partialities it is confes- 
sedly difficult to predict the future, on the wider field of 
the world's great interests, the well-known uniformity of 
human passions and interests render their results calculable 
to the sagacious statesman. 

Thus Draper argues, that nations, like the individuals 
composing them, have fixed periods of growth, manhood, 
decay, decrepitude, and death — more or less rapid, accord- 
ing to the stock and situation. Those who accept that 
dogma argue that all that is necessary in order to predict 
the fate of a nation is a correct calculation of its present 
age ; whether of childhood, manhood, or senility. 

It is wonderful how rashly men will risk their reputation 
for common sense on the sound of a plausible analogy, 
which, even were it valid, would not justify the inference 
drawn from it. For, suppose that there were as fixed laws 
of national as of individual life, can any man predict the 
period of the life of any individual, much less his destiny ? 
May not the life of the nation be as liable to accidents and 
diseases as that of the individual ? 

But the claim has been actually made, that the skillful 
statesman, or philosophic observer, is- able to foresee, and 



212 



PROPHECY. 



foretell, even such accidents. Dean Stanley quotes Mill as 
suggesting an ordinary sign of statesmanship in modern 
times : " To have made predictions often verified by the 
event, seldom or never falsified by it." 

Others give a still wider range to prophetic inspiration. 
They tell us that all genius is prophetic, inasmuch as it 
grasps general laws, universal in their range, and unvariable 
in their operation, the application of which to particular 
events constitutes prediction. The Hebrew prophets were 
sagacious observers of human nature, and made very shrewd 
calculations of the future progress of events by a careful 
induction of the invariable laws of nature from the history 
of the past. But there was nothing supernatural in that. 
Every poet, philosopher, and statesman is more or less of a 
prophet. Indeed foresight, like insight, is common to all 
men : a superior degree of this common possession consti- 
tutes the prophet. Men of profound insight, or of exten- 
sive foresight, are equally rare in all departments of science. 
Ignorance ascribes to supernatural inspiration the sagacity 
derived from extensive observation of nature and history ; 
while philosophy traces to the same source the inspiration of 
Moses and Mohammed, of Isaiah and Apollo, of the Principia, 
Paradise Lost, and the Apocalypse, of Rothschild, Napo- 
leon, and Bismarck. Some geniuses expend themselves in 
poems, some in paintings, others in predictions. All are 
alike imperfect and fallible. Once in centuries, perhaps, 
we are astonished by the advent of a master, while occa- 
sional less perfect attempts and shrewd guesses keep the j 
fires of ambition alive in the human breast. 

But if this were a correct account of the case we should 
have our best prophets as the result of our widest observa- 
tions of nature and history; the best should come last. 
The prophets of this nineteenth century should be far ahead 
of Moses in prophetic foresight, standing as they do on the 
summit of the observatory built by the experience of forty 



PROPHECY. 



213 



centuries. Whereas, as a matter of fact, the world knows 
nothing about these modern prophets, or their predictions. 
The -instances alleged by Rationalists are contemptibly triv- 
ial when compared with the Bible predictions. Contrast, 
for instance, Cayotte's alleged prediction, that the fate of 
Charles would befall Louis XVI., and that the rabble 
would fill Paris with anarchy — with Daniel's grand historic 
outline of the four great empires ; or with our Savior's de- 
tailed prediction of the siege of Jerusalem. Cayotte's guess 
commanded no respect, even while the coming event cast its 
shadow before it ; nor did he profess to utter it in the name 
of the Great Disposer of all events as the seal and authen- 
tication of a revelation of moral duty to man ; and so it 
was of no value to those threatened by the calamity. But 
our Lord's predictions were so authoritative in their tone, 
and so definite in their details, that they enabled his dis- 
ciples to escape the impending destruction at that time ; and 
their fulfillment has furnished a decisive proof of his divine 
foresight to all generations. 

We are told by men who could not read one of Apollo's 
oracles to save their lives, nor recite one of Isaiah's prophe- 
cies to save their souls, that Apollo's oracles, no less than 
Isaiah's, were inspired. Could such persons be prevailed 
upon to read carefully any single prophetic book of Scrip- 
ture, with the historic facts to which it refers, or even the 
briefest abridgment of these facts, such as that contained in 
The Comprehensive Commentary, they would not thus ex- 
pose their ignorance alike of heathen and Christian oracles. 

The differences between them are too numerous to be 
easily enumerated. The oracles of the heathen are always 
sources of gain to their prophets. The ancient Pythoness 
must have a hecatomb, the writing medium a dollar, and 
the modern Pythoness of the platform a dime. But under 
the inspiration of God even a Balaam becomes honest, and 



214 



PROPHECY. 



the leprosy of Naaman marks the sordid Gehazi and his seed 
forever. 

The oracles of the heathen are always immoral in their 
tendency. From the first spiritual communication through 
the serpent medium in the tree of knowledge, down to the 
last spiritual marriage rapped out by the oracle, they are all 
in favor of pride, ambition, lying, lust, and murder. The 
oracles of God begin with a prohibition of curiosity, prid^ . 
covetousness, and theft : " In the day thou eatest thereof 
thou shalt surely die." And they are uniformly of the 
same tenor, forbidding, reproving, threatening vice, and en- 
couraging virtue, down to the last : " Blessed are they that 
do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree 
of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city ; 
for without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and 
murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh 
a lie." 

This last mark — falsehood — belongs to all heathen oracles, 
from the first utterance by the serpent, down to the last re- 
sponse rapped out by the medium. Take any one heathen 
oracle of which we have any definite account — and the 
number is very small — and you will find that, if it is not " as 
equivocal as Apollo," it is false. 

For instance, Dean Stanley very confidently refers to cer- 
tain heathen oracles, " the fulfillment of which, according 
to Cicero, could not be denied without a perversion of all 
history. Such was the foreshadowing of the twelve cen- . 
turies of Roman dominion, by the legend of the apparition 
of the twelve vultures to Romulus, which was so understood 
400 years before its accomplishment." Comparing the pro- 
phetic, predictions with such fables, he says : 11 It is not that 
they are more exact in particulars of time and place; none 
can be more so than that of the twelve centuries of the 
Roman Empire."* 

* Jewish Church, 463, 4. The Bible, 80. 



PROPHECY. 



215 



The oracle thus exalted to a level with the predictions of 
our Lord and his apostles is quoted by Censorinus,* A. D. 
238, from Varro, who died B. C. 28. Varro stated that 
he had heard Vettius, no common augur, of great genius in 
disputing, a match with any of the most learned, say, " If 
it was so, as the historians related, as to the auguries of the 
founding of the city of Romulus and the twelve vultures, 
since the Roman people had passed 120 years safe, it would 
reach 1,200." 

Dean Stanley misquotes the oracle, and does injustice to 
the old heathen prophet. He spake no word whatever 
about dominion; all he dared conjecture for his city was 
safety. Even that is put in a highly hypothetical mood. 
The augury begins with an "if," regarding the apocryphal 
story of Romulus and the twelve vultures. But whether 
the fable of the vultures be true or not, the augury of twelve 
centuries of .safety deduced from it is undeniably false, 
whether it refers to the material city, or to the political 
constitution then established. The city then built was 
burnt by Brennus, the Gaul. Its successor was taken and 
plundered by Alaric, in A. D. 410; again by Genseric, and 
the Vandals, in 455 ; and again by the Ostrogoths, in 54G. 
Thus the material city was repeatedly taken and destroyed 
during the twelve centuries succeeding its founding. If the 
augury referred to the duration of the political constitution 
then instituted, every school-boy knows that half a dozen 
revolutions falsified the prediction. If, however, it bo al- 
leged that it referred to the ultimate fate of the city of 
Rome, that it should cease to exist after twelve centuries, it 
is self-evidently false; for now. after the lapse of twenty- 
six centuries, Rome is larger, its people more numerous, and 
its territory wider than it was for centuries after Romulus 
saw the twelve vultures. Thus God "frustrateth the tokens 



* De Die Natal i, c. 17, cited in Pusey on Daniel, 642. 



216 



PROPHECY. 



of the liars." Yet men who have read Roman history, and 
whose business it is to read their Bibles, continue to cite 
Vettius Yaleus as a prophet, and to compare his false au- 
guries with the predictions of the Scriptures of truth ! 

This is only one of a number of such secular predictions 
confidently cited by the learned Dean as having been as 
minute and specific as those of Scripture, and undeniably 
fulfilled. But a scholar of his own church has examined 
his references and alleged facts, and the result is, that not a 
single instance remains of the fulfillment of any definite 
prediction given by the original writers; and where the 
transcriber and the Dean have helped them out to a more 
definite prediction, it has proved a false prophecy, as in the 
case of Sterling's and Spence's prediction of the year of the 
disruption of the Union of the United States. Dr. Pusey 
summarizes this discussion in his work on Daniel (p. 637), 
Jrom which we extract and condense the following para- 
graphs on this subject : 

" Dean Stanley produces a certain number of alleged pre- 
dictions in secular history, as counterparts of the predic- 
tions of the political events of their own, and the surround- 
ing nations," in the Hebrew prophets, i. e. (in religious 
language), "of Grod's judgments upon both for their sins 
against himself and their fellow-men." He says, "Every 
one knows instances, both in ancient and modern times, of 
predictions which have been uttered, and fulfilled, in regard 
to events of this kind. Sometimes such predictions have 
been the results of political foresight. Many instances will 
occur to students of history. Even within our own memory 
the great catastrophe of the disruption of the United States 
of America was foretold, even with the exact date, several 
years beforehand. Sometimes there has been an anticipa- 
tion of some future epoch in the pregnant sayings of emi- 
nent philosophers and poets ; as for example the intimation 
of the discovery of America by Seneca; or of Shakespeare 



PROPHECY. 



217 



by Plato; or the Reformation by Dante. Sometimes the 
result has been produced by the power of divination, granted 
in some inexplicable manner to ordinary men. Of such a 
kind were many of the ancient oracles, the fulfillment of 
which, according to Cicero, could not be denied without a 
perversion of history. Such was the foreshadowing of the 
twelve centuries of Roman dominion by the legend of the 
apparition of the twelve vultures to Romulus, which was so 
understood 400 years before its actual accomplishment. 
Such, but with less certainty, was the traditional prediction 
of the conquest of Constantinople by the Mussulmans; the 
alleged predictions by Archbishop Malachi, whether com- 
posed in the eleventh or sixteenth centuries, of the series 
of popes down to the present time; not to speak of the 
well-known instances which are recorded both in French 
and English history. But there are several points which at 
once place the prophetic predictions on a different level 
from any of these. It is not that they are more exact in 
particulars of time and place; none can be more so than 
that of the twelve centuries of the Roman Empire; and 
our Lord himself has excluded the precise knowledge of 
times and seasons from the widest and highest range of pro- 
phetic vision." (Jewish Church, 463. The Bible: its Form 
and Substance, pages 80, 82.) 

"It might safely be admitted," says Dr. Pusey, "that the 
outward predictions of time and place are of the body, 
rather than of the soul of prophecy, yet as indications that 
he revealed himself, who alone could know long before what 
ho willed to bring to pass by his Providence, the predictions 
of the Hebrew prophets are not to be paralleled by any hu- 
man history. 

"Definite predictions of the Hebrew prophets have been 
instanced above. Dr. Stanley's instances of secular fulfill- 
ment are unhappy." He then proceeds to examine in their 
turn the political, poetic, Popish, Mohammedan, and heathen 
oracles quoted by Dean Stanley. 



218 



PROPHECY. 



I. The Political Predictions. 

Sterling, as quoted by Mr. Spence, so far from predict- 
ing the great catastrophe of the disruption of the United 
States at the end of the four years, says that no wise man 
would predict anything even within those four years. " It 
appears to me that amid so many elements of uncertainty 
as to the future, both from the excited state of men's minds 
in the States themselves, and the complication of surround- 
ing circumstances, no wise man would venture to foretell 
the probable issue of American affairs during the next four 
years." (On the American Union, page 14.) And this 
was written amid all the heavings which preceded the burst- 
ing of the volcano. It followed, after statesmen had, one 
after another, seen the elements of that disruption. The 
probability of the severance of the North and South has 
been a speculation to which the older of us have long been 
familiar. And now [1864] who would venture to predict 
the time of the close of that sad war? (First edition.) 
Now [1865] that it has come to an end Americans taunt 
Europeans with their want of foresight in their anticipa- 
tions as to its issue The Times correspondent retorts as 
to false anticipations of Americans — (1) that the issue would 
not interfere with slavery ; (2) that there would be separa- 
tion without bloodshed ; (3) that the war would last only 
some ninety days; (4) that the United States would break 
up into fragments (Northern) ; (5) they contemplated that 
the interests of trade would suffice for the harmony of 
North and South when separated, etc., etc. June 6, 1865. 
Europeans almost universally anticipated the success of the 
South. So little did the human sagacity of men really sa- 
gacious, with intimate knowledge of the strength of the 
different parties, their numbers, resources, and all the cal- 
culations as to modern warfare, enable them to anticipate 
within half a year the result of a war, which, through the 
vivid description of it, and clear knowledge, was carried on 



PROPHECY. 



219 



almost under their eyes. And these men would have us to 
suppose that Hebrew prophets, living in the center of a 
small people, could, with mere human knowledge, foretell 
with absolute certainty the overthrow of nourishing em- 
pires, when at the acme of their power ! 

II. The So-called Prophecies of S. Malachi. 

These have long been recognized to be a forgery, unmean- 
ing except for the immediate purpose for which they were 
"forged by the partisans of the Cardinal Simoncelli, one of 
the candidates for the tiara, who was designated by the 
words 'de antiquitate orbis,' because he was of Orvieto, 
in Latin, 'orbs vetus.' "(Biog. Unv'l v. Wion.) Menestrier 
published a refutation of the pretended prophecies of S. 
Malachi, Paris, 1689, written with much solidity. Don 
Feijoo also refuted these pretended prophecies in his Teatro 
Critico.* The Noveau Dictionnaire Historique, by MM. 
Chaudon and Delaudine, speaks of the "errors and ana- 
chronisms with which this impertinent list swarms." "The 
forgetfulncss of common sense makes itself felt in a few 
pages. Those who have set themselves to explain these 
too noted insipidities, always find some allusion, forced or 
probable, in the country, name, arms, birth, talents of the 
popes, the cardinalatory dignities they had borne, etc. ; e. g., 
the prophecy which related to Urban the Eighth was, 
Lilium ct Roscc." It was fulfilled to the very letter, say 
these absurd interpreters, for that pope had in his coat of 
arms bees, which suck lilies and roses. (Art. Malachi and 
Wion.) 

III. Dr. Pusey proceeds to examine the process by 
which a prediction of the conquest of Constantinople has 
been manufactured for the false prophet, Mohammed. 

"In the mosque of Sultan Mohammed the Second," 
says V. Hammer, " which was finished A. D. 1469, there 
stands, to the right of the main door, on a marble slab, on 



220 



PROPHECY. 



an azure field, in gold raised characters, the tradition of the 
prophet relating to Constantinople. 'They will conquer 
Constantinople; and blessed the prince, blessed the army 
which shall fulfill this.' " (Constant v. d. Bosporos I. 393.) 
Or (as he renders more exactly in Gresch d Osm. Reich, p. 
523), "the best prince is he who conquers it, and the best 
army, his army." This tradition, being above eight centu- 
ries after Mohammed, has, of course, no value. It reappears 
in a different form in Ockley, the conquest being presup- 
posed, rather than prophesied. Ockley says (History of 
Saracens, II. 128), " Mohammed having said, 1 The sins of the 
first army which takes the city of the Caesar are forgiven.' " 
Ockley referring only vaguely to Bokhari, who, early in the 
third century, after Mohannried selected 7,000 traditions 
which he held to be genuine, out of some 267,000, I ap- 
plied to my friend, M. Beinaud, professor of Arabic at 
Paris, and member of the Institute, not doubting that with 
his large knowledge he would be able to point out to me the 
passage in the Sahih. This, with his well-known kindness, 
he has done, amid his many labors. It puts an end to all 
questions about prophecy. The passage is this : As Omm 
Heram has related to us that she heard the prophet say, 
"The first army of my people which shall war by sea will 
acquire merits with Grod, Omm Heram said, 'I said, O 
Apostle of Grod, I will be among them.' He said, 'Thou 
shalt be among them.' Then the prophet said, 'The first 
army of my people which shall attack the city of the Cae- 
sar, their sins shall be forgiven them.' Then I said, 'I will 
be with them, O Apostle of God.' He said, 'No!'" M. 
Beinaud adds, "There is no question but that Mohammed 
conceived the idea of the invasion of the Boman Empire, 
and of the kingdom of Persia by his disciples. He himself 
shortly before his death tried his strength against the Boman 
forces in Syria. But the passage does not say what Ockley 



PROPHECY. 



221 



makes him say. It does not say that Constantinople would 
be taken." 

The other prophecy referred to by Yon Hammer is as 
follows: "Have you heard of a city of which one side is 
land, the two others sea? They said, 'Yea, O Apostle of 
God.' He said, 'The last hour will not come without its 
being conquered by 70,000 sons of Isaac. When they come 
to it they will not fight against it with weapons and engines 
of war, but with the word, There is no god but God, and 
God is great ! ' Then will one side of the sea walls fall ; 
and at the second time the second; and at the third time 
the wall on the land side j and they will enter in with glad- 
ness." 

The framer of this prophecy expected the walls of Con- 
stantinople to fall like those of Jericho, which he must 
have had in mind. He expected it to fall before Arabs, 
"sons of Isaac," not before Turks. * * Yet, contrary 
to the expectation, and the prophecy, it did fall before the 
Turks, alter having been seven times besieged by the 
Arabs, and four times by the Turks ; by whom it was taken 
A. D. 1453. The framer of the prediction anticipated that 
the representatives of the followers of the prophet would 
be Arabs to some indefinite period, near the last hour ; he 
expected a miraculous destruction of Constantinople ; it was 
besieged seven times by those before whose war-cry he ex- 
pected it to fall. It did not fall before those before whom 
he said it would fall ; it fell in an ordinary way, not in that 
predicted ; it was besieged in the way in which he said it 
would not be besieged ; lastly, it fell, but its walls fell not. 
Eorry detail of the 'prediction is contrary to the fact. As 
for the mere capture, it befalls all great cities in turn; so 
that a prediction of the capture of any great city would be 
the safest of all prophecies. But the prediction did not an- 
ticipate, what is now certain, that as soon as Christian jeal- 



222 



PROPHECY. 



ousies permit, before the end of the world, it will be wrested 
from its captors. 

IV. The legend of Romulus and the vultures, and the 
falsehood of the prediction based upon it, have been exposed 
on a previous page. 

V. In regard to Seneca's alleged prediction of the dis- 
covery of America, it was exceedingly vague; and was 
wholly based on the undoubted knowledge of its existence 
by the ancient Egyptians, and by Plato, Proclus, Marcellus, 
Ammianus, Marcellinus, Diodorus, Aristotle, and Plutarch ; 
whose assertions influenced Columbus to undertake the 
search for it. Nothing could be more certain than that 
such a continent would be rediscovered. But in the only 
indication which Seneca gives us of its location he erred; 
for Thule is still the utmost land northward , no new con- 
tinent having been discovered, nor remaining to be discov- 
ered, toward the North Pole. 

VI. As to the heathen oracles we have already spoken 
enough. 

VII. " The anticipation of Shakespeare by Plato amounts 
to this, that he makes Socrates compel his friends to admit, 
( that it belongs to the same man, how to compose comedy 
and tragedy, and that he who is by skill a composer of trage- 
dies is also a composer of comedies.' (Sympos fin.) * * 
But it is mere confusion to speak of this as anticipation. 
Plato does not say that there would be any greater combina- 
tion of the two talents than there had been; he does not 
even say that the highest excellence in one involved excel- 
lence in the other ; he simply says that the two faculties 
belonged to the same mind. According to his maxims, if 
true, it would be rather marvelous that they were not more 
frequently combined than that they were remarkably in one 
mind." 

VIII. " Those best read in Dante are at a loss to find in 
him any trace of a prediction of the Reformation. Dante, 



PROPHECY. 



223 



with his firm faith in all Roman doctrine, could not have 
imagined or anticipated such a disruption as Luther's. Dean 
Stanley corrects an unimportant misprint or two in the sec- 
ond edition of his book, on the ground of the above state- 
ments. He does not even attempt to supply a passage from 
Dante. I have looked for one in vain." 

Yet such a collection of errors, absurdities, falsehoods, 
and impostures is gravely presented, in this nineteenth cen- 
tury, by a learned clergyman, as comparable in regard to ex- 
act fulfillment with the oracles of God. 

It is not intended here to discuss the question of the 
continuance of prophetic powers in the Church. If, as 
many believe, the promise in Joel ii. 28 — "It shall come to 
pass in the last days, saith God, that your sons and your 
daughters shall prophesy," etc. — is a promise not yet ex- 
hausted, predictions given by the Holy Spirit may have been 
given through Christians in former times, and may still be 
given. But if such be the fact, these are not secular pre- 
dictions; but spiritual and supernatural, and of the same 
class with those of Scripture ; they are therefore not to be 
cited by Rationalists as examples of secular prediction. 

But it is objected that "the prophecies of Scripture are 
as obscure as the oracles ; are all wrapped up in symbolical 
language ; that many of them have a double meaning ; that 
no two interpreters are agreed as to the meaning of the un- 
fulfilled predictions; and that no man can certainly foretell 
any future event by means of them." 

The objection proceeds on a total mistake of the nature 
and design of prophecy, which is not to unvail the future 
for the gratification of your curiosity, but to give you direc- 
tion in your present duty; precisely the reverse of the 
oracles referred to, which proposed to tell their votaries 
what should happen, but rarely condescended to direct them 
how to behave themselves so that things might happen well. 
The larger part of the prophecies of Scripture is taken up 



224 



PROPHECT. 



with directions to men how to regulate their conduct, rather 
than with information how God means to regulate his. 
There is just as much of the latter as is sufficient to show 
us that the G-od who gave the Bible governs the world, and 
even that always urges the same moral lesson: "Say ye to 
the righteous that it shall be well with him, for he shall eat 
the fruit of his doings." "TVoe to the wicked; it shall be 
ill with him, for the reward of his hands shall be given him." 
"Whenever a vision relates to what God will do in the dis- 
tant future, it is dark and mysterious ; but whenever any 
directions are given necessary for our immediate duty, then 
the u vision is written and made plain on tables, that he may 
run that readeth it" The possessors of a clearly engrossed 
title-deed have surely no reason to complain that the presi- 
dent has chosen that his seal appended to it shall consist of 
a device, which, by reason of its being hard to read, and 
harder to imitate, secures both himself and them against 
forgery. The double meaning of some prophecies is a 
double check. So far from resembling the equivocations of 
heathen oracles, by taking either of two opposite events for 
a fulfillment, they require both of two corresponding ones ; 
and some prophecies, like a master key, open several suc- 
cessive events, and thus show that the same mind planned 
both locks and key. When the prediction is fulfilled all 
mystery vanishes, and men see plainly that thus it was writ- 
ton ; that is to say, men who look ; for the man who will not 
open his eyes will never see anything that it concerns him 
to know. But the man who thinks that it concerns him so 
much to know what God will do with the world a hundred 
years after he is dead, that unless the prophecies of the 
Bible are all made plain to him, he will neither read God's 
word, nor obey his law, may go on his own way. TVe ex- 
pound no mysteries to such persons ; for it is written, " Xone 
of the wicked shall understand." 

As to the objection taken from the symbolical language of 



PROPHECY. 



225 



prophecy, and which seems to a number of our modern 
critics so weighty that they remove to the purely mythologic 
ground everything " couched in symbolical language," and 
account nothing to be prediction unless " literal history 
written in advance " — I would merely ask, How is it possi- 
ble to reveal heavenly things to earth-born men but by 
earthly figures ? Do you know a single word in your own, 
or any other language to express a spiritual state, or mental 
operation, that is not the name of some material state, or 
physical operation, used symbolically? Heart, soul, spirit, 
idea, memory, imagination, inclination, etc., every one of 
them a figure of speech — a symbol. Nay, is there a letter 
in your own, or in any other alphabet, that was not originally 
a picture of something? I demand to know in what way 
God or man could teach you to know anything you have 
never seen, but by either showing you a picture of it, or 
telling you what it is like ? That is simply by type or sym- 
bol ; these are the only possible media of conveying heav- 
enly truth, or future history to our minds. When, there- 
fore, the skeptic insists that prophecy be given literally, in 
the style of history written in advance, he simply requires 
that God would make it utterly unintelligible. We can 
gather clear and definite ideas from the significant hiero- 
glyphics of symbolical language, but the literalities of his- 
tory written in advance would be worse to decipher than 
the arrow-headed inscriptions of Nineveh. Just imagine 
to yourself Alexander the Great reading Guizot, instead of 
Daniel ; or Hildreth, as being less mysterious than Ezekicl ; 
and meeting, for instance, such a record as this : " In the 
year of Christ, 1847, the United States conquered Mexico 
and annexe! California." "In the year of Christ — what 
new Olympiad may be that? " he would say. " The United 
States of course means the States of the Achaea League, but 
on what shore of the Euxine may Mexico and California be 
found?" What information could Aristotle gather from the 
15 



226 



PROPHECY. 



record that, " In 1857, the Transatlantic Telegraph was in 
operation?" Could all the augurs in the seven-hilled city 
have expounded to Julius Csesar the famous dispatch, if in- 
tercepted in prophetic vision, " Sebastopol was evacuated last 
night, after enduring for three days an infernal fire of shot 
and shell?" Nay, to diminish the vista to even two or 
three centuries, what could Oliver Cromwell, aided by the 
whole Westminster Assembly, have made of a prophetic 
vision of a single newspaper paragraph of history written 
in advance, to inform them that, " Three companies of 
dragoons came down last night from Berwick to South- 
ampton, by a special train, traveling 54J miles an hour, in- 
cluding stoppages, and embarked immediately on arrival. 
The fleet put to sea at noon, in the face of a full gale from 
the S. W. ? " Why, the intelligible part of this single para- 
graph would seem to them more impossible, and the unintel- 
ligible part more absurd, than all the mysterious symbols of 
the Apocalypse. 

The world has accepted God's symbols thousands of years 
ago, and it is too late in the day for our reformers to propose 
new laws of thought, and forms of speech, to the human 
race. David's prophetic lyrics, Christ's graphic parables, 
Isaiah's celestial anthems, Ezekiel's glorious symbols, and 
Solomon's terse proverbs, will be recited and admired, ages 
after the foggy abstractions of mystified metaphysicians 
have vanished from the earth. The Thirst of Passion, the 
Cup of Pleasure, the Fountain of the Water of Life, the 
Blood of Murder, the Rod of Chastisement, the Iron Scep- 
ter, the Fire of Wrath, the Balance of Righteousness, the 
Sword of J ustice, the Wheels of Providence, the Conserva- 
tive Mountains, the Raging Seas of Anarchy, and the Gol- 
den, Brazen, and Iron Ages, will reflect their images in 
truth's mirror, and photograph their lessons on memory's 
tablet, while the mists of the "positive philosophy," "the 
absolute," and "the conditioned," float past unheeded, to 



PROPIIECY. 



227 



the land of forgetfulness. God's prophetic symbols are the 
glorious embodiments of living truths, while man's philo- 
sophic abstractions are the melancholy ghosts of expiring 
nonsense. 

The prophetic symbols are sufficiently plain to be dis- 
tinctly intelligible after the fulfillment, as we shall presently 
see ; sufficiently obscure to baffle presumptuous curiosity 
before it. Had they been so written as to be fully intelligi- 
ble beforehand, they must have interfered with man's free 
agency, by causing their own fulfillment. They hide the fu- 
ture sufficiently to make man feel his ignorance ; they re- 
veal enough to encourage faith in the God who rules futurity. 

The revelation of future events, however, is not the prin- 
cipal design of the prophecies of the Bible ; they bear wit- 
ness to God's powerful present influence over the world now. 
For God's prophecy is not merely his foretelling something 
which will certainly happen at some future time, but over 
which he has no control — as an astronomer foretells an 
eclipse of the sun, but can neither hasten nor hinder it — 
but it is his revealing of a part of his plan of this world's 
affairs, to show that God, and not man, is the sovereign of 
this world. For this purpose he tells beforehand the actions 
which wicked men, of their own free will, will commit, con- 
trary to his law, and the measures he will take to thwart 
their designs, and fulfill his own. Nay, he declares he will 
so manage matters that, without their knowledge, and even 
contrary to their intentions, heathen armies, and infidel 
scoffers shall serve his purposes, and show his power ; while 
yet they are as perfectly voluntary in all their movements 
as if they, and not God, governed the world. Every ful- 
filled prophecy thus becomes an instance and evidence of a 
supernatural government; and is, to a thinking mind, a 
greater miracle than casting mountains into the sea. The 
style of prophecy corresponds to this design. It is not by 



228 



PROPHECY. 



any means apologetic, or supplicating ; but, on the con- 
trary, majestic, convincing, and terrifying to the ungodly. 

" Remember this and show yourselves men. 

11 Bring it again to mind, ye transgressors. 

11 For I am God, and there is none else. 

"I am God, and there is none like me. 

"Declaring the end from the beginning, 

"And from ancient times the things that are not yet done, 

"Saying, 1 My counsel shall stand, and I will do 

ALL MY PLEASURE.' "* 

Infidels feel the power of this manifestation of Glod in his 
word ; and are driven to every possible denial of the fact, 
and evasion of the argument drawn from it. They feel in- 
stinctively that Bible prophecies are far more than mere 
predictions. They would rather endow every human being 
on earth with the power of predicting the future than al- 
low the Grod of heaven that power of ruling the present 
which these prophecies assert. Hence the attempt to ad- 
mit their predictive truth, and yet deny their divine author- 
ity, by ascribing them to human sagacity. 

Transatlantic steam navigation has produced a remarka- 
ble change in the tone of Infidel writers and speakers in re- 
gard to the prophecies of the Bible. You could not con- 
verse long with an Infidel on this subject, a few years ago, 
until he would assure you, with all confidence, that the 
prophecies were all written after their fulfillment, and so 
were not prophecies at all. But now that travelers of all 
classes, scoffers, sailors, and doctors in divinity, scientific 
expeditions, and correspondents of daily papers, have 
flooded the world with undeniable attestations that many of 
them are receiving their fulfillment at this day, none but 
the most grossly ignorant and stupid attempt to deny that 
the prophecies of the Bible were written thousands of years 



* Isaiah, chap. xlvi. 8-11. 



PROPHECY. 



229 



since, and that many of them have since been accomplished ; 
and that so many have been fulfilled that their accomplish- 
ment can not be ascribed to chance. But the force of the 
argument for the divine inspiration of the prophets is met 
by the assertion, that there is nothing supernatural in proph- 
ecy, and that it is only one form of the inspiration of genius 
applying the general laws of nature. 

Calculating securely on that profound ignorance of the 
Bible which characterizes their followers, modern writers 
inform them that i: none of the prophets ever uttered any 
distinct, definite, unambiguous prediction of any future 
event which has since taken place, which a man without a 
miracle could not equally well predict." It is alleged that 
the prophecies, in predicting the overthrow of the nations 
of antiquity, predicted nothing beyond the ken of human 
sagacity, enlightened by a careful study of the experience 
of the past, and the invariable laws of nature; that it re- 
quires no inspiration to foretell the decay of perishing 
things; that the invariable progress of all things, empires 
as well as individuals, is first upward, through a period of 
youthful vigor and energy, then onward through a period of 
ripe maturity, and then downward, through a gradual decay, 
and final dissolution, to the inevitable grave. The world's 
history is but a history of the decline and fall of nations. 

1. Now, if this l)e true, it is an awful truth for the Infi- 
del, for it sweeps away the last vestige of a foundation of his 
hope for eternity. The only reason any unbeliever in Rev- 
elation could ever give, or that modern nationalists do give, 
for their hope of a happy eternity, is the analogy of nature 
— the alleged constant progress of all things toward perfec- 
tion in this world. It is an awkward truth that individually 
we must die, and the worms crawl over us; but then the 
wretched fate of the individual was to be compensated by 
the glorious progress of the race onward and ever onward 
and upward; from the fungus to the frog, and from the 



230 



PROPHECY. 



frog to the monkey, from the monkey to the man, from the 
noble savage wild in woods, to the pastoral tribe, thence to 
the empire and the federal republic, and finally to the reign 
of individual and passional attraction, and union with the 
sum of all the intelligences of the universe, through a con- 
stant progress toward infinite perfection. 

But, alas ! it seems it was a false analogy, an ill-observed 
feet, a delusion; the course of nature is all the other way. 
The tendency of all perishing things is not to perfection, 
but to perdition; and it needs no inspiration to tell that 
man's loftiest towers, and strongest cities, and proudest em- 
pires will come to ruin ; or that the most polished, power- 
ful, and populous nations of antiquity will dwindle down 
into Turks, Moors, and Egyptians. Here is a fact of awful 
omen. Death reigns in this world of ours; death moral, 
social, political, and physical, has ever trampled upon man, 
proud man, learned man, civilized man, over all the plans 
of man, over every man, and over every association of men, 
even the largest, the widest, the mightiest. And now the 
Infidel, having taken away our hope of help from heaven, 
comes with the serpent's hiss, and fiendish sneer, to taunt 
the perishing world with this miserable truism — that the 
tendency of everything on earth is to perdition, and that it 
needs no inspiration to tell it. Truly it does not. TTere 
that all the prophets of God had to tell us — as it is all the 
prophets of Infidelity can prophecy — we had as little need 
for the one as for the other. Earthquake and hurricane 
volcano and valley flood, autumn frosts and winter blasts, 
fever, consumption, war, and pestilence, the grave-yard and 
the charnel-house, the Parthenon and the Pyramids, the 
silent cities of Colorado, and the buried palaces of Assyria, 
unite to attest this awful doom. 

But what reason has the skeptic to believe that this in- 
variable law of nature shall ever be repealed, and this inev- 
itable progress of all things to perdition be arrested? Why 



PROPHECY. 



231 



may not men be as selfish, and filthy, and grasping, and 
murderous in the other world, as they are in this? Why 
may not the course of nature be as fatal to the sinner's 
prosperity there as it is here? Why may not the progress 
of the proud empires and spheres of futurity be such as 
the skeptic declares the progress of the past to have been, 
so invariably toward dissolution and death, that it shall need 
no inspiration to predict its course downward, downward, ever 
downward, to endless perdition? Stand forward, skeptic, 
and point the world to an instance in which an ungodly 
nation has stemmed this all-destroying torrent of ruin; or 
acknowledge that all you can promise the nations of the 
world to come, from your experience of the invariable laws 
of nature, is perdition, endless perdition. 

2. It is manifest, however, that this destruction of nations 
and desolation of empires must have had a beginning some 
time or other. Nations could not perish before they had 
grown, nor empires be destroyed till they had accumulated; 
and during all this period of their growth and vigor the 
experience of mankind would never lead them to predict 
their ruin. The sagacious observer, beholding Babylon, 
Nineveh, Damascus, and Tyre, growing and flourishing dur- 
ing a period of a thousand years past, could have had no 
reason from such an experience to expect anything else 
than a thousand years of prosperity to come. Especially 
impossible is it for human sagacity, enlightened by experi- 
ence, to predict unexampled' desolations, destructions such 
as the world had never witnessed. 

Now the predictions of the Bible are predictions of un- 
exampled desolations, and unparalleled ruin of empires. The 
desolation of any extensive region of the earth, or the over- 
throw of any great nation, was an event absolutely unknown 
to the world when the prophets of the Bible began to utter 
their predictions; unless the skeptic will allow the truth of 
the Bible record of the prediction and execution of the 



232 



PROPHECY. 



deluge, and the destruction of Sodom. War and conquest 
had indeed caused some provinces to change masters; one 
nation had made marauding invasions on others, and carried 
off cattle and slaves ; hut the result of the greatest military 
operation of which we have any record, at the commence- 
ment of the prophetic era — the conquest of Palestine by 
the Israelites — so far from desolating the region, or exter- 
minating the people, had been merely to increase its pro- 
ductiveness, and to drive its former occupants to new set- 
tlements, where at that era they were fully able to cope 
with their former conquerors. Whatever the experience of 
thirty centuries may have since taught the nations concern- 
ing the certainty of the connection between national crime 
and national ruin, a long-suffering God had not then given 
any such signal examples of it, as those of which he gave 
warning by the prophets. 

The course of the nations and cities founded after the 
deluge had been regularly onward and prosperous, and they 
were just rising to the maturity of their power and splen- 
dor when Jonah, Micah, Hosea, and Isaiah, began to pro- 
nounce their sentences. They denounced desolation and 
solitude against nations more populous than this continent, 
one of whose cities enumerated more citizens than some of 
our proud commonwealths, and displayed buildings, a sight 
of whose crumbling ruins is deemed sufficient recompense 
for the perils of a journey of six thousand miles. The 
hundred churches of Cincinnati could all have been conven- 
iently arranged in the basement of the temple of Belus; 
on the first floor our hundred thousand non-church-going 
citizens might have assembled to listen to a lecture on spir- 
itualism from some eloquent Chaldean soothsayer; and the 
remaining seven stories would have still been open for the 
accommodation of the natives of the original Queen City. 
Every product of earth was trafficked in the markets of 
Tyre ; a single Jewish house imported annually more gold 



PROPHECY. 



233 



than all the banks of this continent possess; and the whole 
coinage of the United States since 1793 would want a hun- 
dred millions of dollars of the value of the golden furni- 
ture of a single temple in Babylon. In fact, in the suburbs 
of Babylon or Nineveh, Washington or Cincinnati would 
have been insignificant villages; and the stone-fronted brick 
palaces of Broadway and the Fifth Avenue would make 
passable stables and haylofts for the mansions of Thebes or 
Petra. 

So far, therefore, from being the teaching of experience, 
there was nothing more utterly unexampled and unparalleled 
than the complete desolation of any nation at the time the 
prophets of Israel predicted such things. If the world has 
grown wiser since regarding the decline and fall of empires, 
it has gathered the best part of its sagacity from the proph- 
ecies. 

The degradation of the seed of Ham, and the colonization 
of Asia by the descendants of Japhet, were however unde- 
niably predicted by Noah long before any examples or ex- 
periences of such things had occurred. Centuries after the 
degradation of Canaan had been predicted, his descendants 
were powerful, prosperous, and colonizing the shores of the 
world. But God foresaw, and compelled their ancestor to 
foretell, the corruption of the blood which would reduce 
his descendants to be servants of servants to their breth- 
ren ; and now the ruins of their cities, and of the people 
descended from Canaan, are proverbial alike in the libraries 
and slave markets of the world. 

But on the other hand, the colonization of the world by 
the descendants of Japhet was as particularly predicted by 
Noah as the degradation of the Canaanites; and this can 
not be called a prediction of destruction, but rather of great 
prosperity: "God shall enlarge Japhet." Every emigrant 
ship which discharges its cargo at New York, and every 
new prairie farm in America, and every sheep ranch in 



234 



PROPHECY. 



Australia, and every new cattle kraal in South Africa ful- 
fills the prediction: "He shall dwell in the tents of Shem." 
The various Greek, Roman, English, and Russian Empires 
of Asia attest the truth. From the Volga to the Amour, 
and from Hong Kong to Singapore, and from the Ganges 
to the Indus, Japhet to-day dwells in the tents of Shem. 

3. The prophecies of the Bible are not vague general de- 
nunciations of natural decline and extinction to all the na- 
tions of the world, which, if they were merely the exposi- 
tion of a universal natural law of national death, they would 
be; nor yet the application of any such natural and inevit- 
able law to some particular nation, denouncing its destruc- 
tion, without any specification of time, manner, instrument, 
or cause of its infliction. They are all the applications of 
moral law — sentences pronounced on account of national 
wickedness. In every case the prophecy charges the crimes, 
and specifies the punishment, selected by the J udge of all 
the earth. The nations selected as examples of divine jus- 
tice are as various as their sentences are different ; covering 
a space as long as from Eastport to San Francisco, and 
climes as various as those between Canada and Cuba ; peo- 
pled by men of every shade of color and degree of capacity, 
from the negro servant of servants, to the builders of the 
Coliseum, and the Pyramids. They minutely describe, in 
their own expressive symbols, the nations yet unfounded, 
and kings unborn, who should ignorantly execute the judg- 
ments of the Lord. They predict the futures of over thirty 
States, no two of which are alike; each prediction embrac- 
ing a large number of minute particulars, any one of which 
was utterly beyond the range of human sagacity. To predict 
that a man will die may require no great sagacity ; but to 
tell the year of his death, that he will die as a criminal, al- 
lege the crime for which he will be sentenced, the time, 
place, and manner of his execution, and the name of the 
sheriff who will execute the sentence, is plainly beyond the 



PROPHECY. 



235 



skill of man. Such is the character of Bible predictions. 
Zedekiah's sentence was thus pronounced; and thus, too, 
the sentences of nations doomed to ruin for their crimes are 
recorded in the Bible, that men may know that the mouth of 
the Lord hath spoken them. If, for instance, a prophet should 
declare that New York should be overturned, and become a 
little fishing village, and that her stones and timber, and her 
very dust, should be scraped off and thrown into the East 
River; that Philadelphia should become a swamp, and never 
be inhabited, from generation to generation ; that Columbus 
should be deserted, and become a hog-pen ; that Louisville 
should become a dry, barren desert; and New Orleans be ut- 
terly consumed with fire, and never be built again ; that learn- 
ing should depart from Boston, and no travelers ever pass 
through it any more ; that New England should become the 
basest of the nations, and no native American ever be Pres- 
ident of the Union, but that it should be a spoil and a prey 
to the most savage tribes; and that the Russians should 
tread Washington under foot for a thousand years ; but that 
God would preserve Pittsburg in the midst of destruction — 
and if all these things should come to pass, would any man 
dare to deny that the prophet spake not the dictates of hu- 
man sagacity, or the calculations of genius, but the words 
of God? 

To attempt to illustrate the divine wisdom displayed in a 
system of connected predictions, covering the destiny of 
the nations of the world, and extending from the dawn of 
history to the end of time, by presenting two or three in- 
stances of the fulfillment of specific predictions, would be 
something like exhibiting a fragment of a column as a mon- 
ument of the skill of the architect of a temple; yet, as 
such a fragment may excite the curiosity of the traveler to 
visit the structure whence it was taken, I shail present two 
or three prophecies in which specific predictions are given, 
concerning the geographical, political, social, and religious 



236 



PROPHECY. 



condition of three of the great nations of antiquity — Egypt, 
Judea, and Babylon — the fulfillment of which is spread 
over the surface of empires and the ruins of cities, patent 
to all travelers at the present hour, and abundantly attested 
in many volumes.* 

Could human sagacity have calculated that Egypt — the 
most defensible country in the world, bounded on the south 
by inaccessible mountains, on the east by the Red Sea, on 
the west by the trackless, burning desert; able to defend 
the mouths of her river with a powerful navy, and to drown 
an invading army every year by the inundation of the Nile ; 
which had not only maintained her independence, but ex- 
tended her conquests for a thousand years past, whose vic- 
torious king, Apries, had just sent an expedition against 
Cyprus, besieged and taken Gaza and Sidon, vanquished the 
Tyrians by sea, mastered Phoenicia and Palestine, and 
boasted that not even a god could deprive him of his pos- 
sessions — Egypt, which had given arts, sciences, and idola- 
try to half the world, and which had not risen to the full 
height of its world-wide fame, or the extent of its influence 
for twenty-five years after the predictionf — that Egypt 
should be invaded, conquered, spoiled, become a prey to 
strangers and evermore to strangers, never have a native 
prince, sink into barbarism, renounce idolatry, and become 
famous for her desolations? Yet the Bible predictions are 
specific on all these matters : "/ will make the rivers dry, 
and sell the land into the hand of the wicked: and I will 
make the land waste, and all that is therein, by the hand of I 
strangers : I the Lord have spoken it. Thus saith the Lord 

* Newton on the Prophecies, and Keith on the Prophecies, are to 
be found in all respectable libraries. The former contains valuable 
extracts from ancient historians; the latter from the journals and 
engravings of travelers. 

f Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, I. 169. Herodotus, II. 169. 



PROPHECY. 



237 



God; 1 10 ill also destroy the idols, and I will cause the im- 
ages to cease out of Noph; and there shall be no more a 
prince of the land of Egypt* 

Let Infidels read the fulfillment of these predictions, as 
described by Infidels: "Such is the state of Egypt. De- 
prived twenty-three centuries ago of her natural proprietors, 
she has seen her fertile fields successively a prey to the Per- 
sians, the Macedonians, the Romans, the Greeks, the Arabs, 
the Georgians, and at length the race of Tartars distin- 
guished by the name of the Ottoman Turks. The Mame- 
lukes, purchased as slaves and introduced as soldiers, soon 
usurped the power and selected a leader. If their first es- 
tablishment was a singular event, their continuance is not 
less extraordinary; they are replaced by slaves brought 
from their original country."f Says Gibbon: "A more un- 
just and absurd constitution can not be devised than that 
which condemns the natives of the country to perpetual 
servitude under the arbitrary dominion of strangers and 
slaves. Yet such has been the state of Egypt about five 
hundred years. The most illustrious sultans of the Baharite 
and Beyite dynasties were themselves promoted from the 
Tartar and Circassian bands; and the four and twenty beys, 
or military chiefs, have ever been succeeded, not by their 
sons, but by their servants."! Mehemet Ali cut off the 
Mamelukes, but, still Egypt is ruled by the Turks, and the 
present ruler (Ibrahim Pasha) is a foreigner. It is need- 
less to remind the reader that the idols are cut off. Neither 
the nominal Christians of Egypt, nor the iconoclastic Mos- 
lem, allow images to appear among them. The rivers, too, 
are drying up. In one day's travel forty dry water-courses 
will be crossed in the Delta; and water-skins are needed 

* Ezekiel, chap. xxx. 

t Volney's Travels, 1, 74, 103. 

% Decline and Fall, chap. lix. 



238 



PROPHECY. 



now around the ruined cities whose walls were blockaded by 
Greek and Roman navies. 

"It shall be the basest of the kingdoms; neither shall it 
exalt itself any more above the nations: for I will diminish 
them, that they shall no more bear rule over the ?iations."* 
Every traveler will attest the truth of this prediction. The 
wretched peasantry are rejoiced to labor for any who will 
pay them five cents a day, and eager to hide the treasure in 
the ground from the rapacious tax-gatherer. I have seen 
British horses refuse to eat the meal ground from the mix- 
ture of wheat, barley, oats, lentiles, millet, and a hundred 
unknown seeds of weeds and collections of filth, which forms 
the produce of their fields. For poverty, vermin, and dis- 
ease, Egypt is proverbial. Let us hear a scoffer's testimony, 
however: "In Egypt there is no middle class, neither no- 
bility, clergy, merchants, nor landholders. A universal air 
of misery in all the traveler meets points out to him the 
rapacity of oppression, and the distrust attendant upon 
slavery. The profound ignorance of the inhabitants equally 
prevents them from perceiving the causes of their evils, or 
applying the necessary remedies. Ignorance, diffused through 
every class, extends its effects to every species of moral and 
physical knowledge. Nothing is talked of but intestine 
troubles, the public misery, pecuniary extortions, and bas- 
tinadoes, "y 

The objector perhaps will allege in extenuation the mod- 
ern improvements now in progress, the Suez Canal, the rail- 
roads, the steamboats on the Nile, the bridge across the Nile 
at Cairo, and the sugar and cotton plantations. 

But if these were as evident tokens of progress in Egypt, 
as they would be in America, they would not in the least 
invalidate the facts of the past degradation of Egypt for 



* Ezekiel, chap. xxix. 
t Volney I. 190. 



PROPIIECY. 



239 



centuries. But these speculations of the Khedive are of 
no advantage to the people; rather, on the contrary, do they 
afford him additional opportunities of exacting forced labor 
from the miserable peasants. I have seen the population of 
several villages, forced to leave their own fields in the spring, 
to march down to an old, filthy canal, near Cairo, and al- 
most within sight of the gate of the palace, men, and wo- 
men, and little boys, and girls, like those of our Sabbath- 
schools, scooping up the stinking mud and water with their 
hands, into baskets, carrying them on their heads up the 
steep bank, beaten with long sticks by the taskmasters to 
hasten their steps ; while steam dredges lay unused within 
sight. Egypt is still the basest of the nations. 

Here, then, we have conclusive proof of the fulfillment 
at this day of four distinct, specific, and improbable Bible 
predictions: concerning the country, the rulers, the relig- 
ion, and the people of Egypt. 

Let us note now a distinct and totally different judgment 
pronounced against the transgressors of another land. Pre- 
eminent in inflicting destruction on others, her retribution 
was to be extreme. Degradation and slavery were to be the 
portion of the learned Egyptians, but utter extinction is the 
doom of mighty Babylon. It is written in the Bible con- 
cerning the laud where the farmer was accustomed to reap 
two hundred-fold: u Ca t off the sower from Babylon, and 
him that handlcth the sickle in the time of harvest. * * * 
Every purpose of the Lord shall be performed against Baby 
Ion, to make tlie land of Babylon a desolation ivithout an in- 
habitant. * * * Behold the hindermost of the nations 
shall be a vUdcrness, a dry land, and a desert. * * * 
Because of the wrath of the Lord it shall not be inhabited, 
bat it shall be wholly desolate."* 

Proofs in abundance of the fulfillment of these predio- 

* Jeremiah, chaps. 1. and li. 



240 



PROPHECY. 



tioDS present themselves in every volume of travels in As- 
syria and Chaldea. " Those splendid accounts of the Baby- 
lonian lands yielding crops of grain of two and three hun- 
dred fold, compared with the modern face of the country, 
afford a remarkable proof of the singular desolation to which 
it has been subjected. The canals at present can only be 
traced by their decayed banks. The soil of this desert con- 
sists of a hard clay, mixed with mud, which at noon be- 
comes so heated with the sun's rays, that I found it too hot 
to walk over it with any degree of comfort."^ " That it was 
at some former period in a far different state is evident from 
the number of canals by which it is traversed, now dry and 
neglected; and the quantity of heaps of earth, covered with 
fragments of brick and broken tiles, which are seen in every 
direction — the indisputable traces of former cultivation, "f 
" The abundance of the country has vanished as clean away 
as if the besom of desolation had swept it from north to 
south; the whole land, from the outskirts of Babylon to the 
farthest stretch of sight, lying a melancholy waste. Not a 
habitable spot appears for countless miles ."J 

As the desolation of the country was to be extraordinary, 
so the desolation of the city of Babylon was to be remark- 
able. When the prophet wrote, its walls had been raised 
to the height of three hundred and fifty feet, and made 
broad enough for six chariots to drive upon them abreast. 
From its hundred brazen gates issued the armies which 
trampled under foot the liberties of mankind, and presented 
their lives to the nod of a despot, who slew whom he would, 
and whom he would allowed to live. Twenty years' provis- 
ions were collected within its walls, and the world would 
not believe that an enemy could enter its gates. Neverthe- 

* Mignons Travels, 31. 

t Trans. Bombay Lit. Soc. I. 123. 

% Porter's Babylonia, II. 285. 



PROPHECY. 



241 



less, the prophets of God pronounced against it a doom of 
destruction as extraordinary as the pride and wickedness 
which procured it. Tyre, the London of Asia, was to be- 
come a place for the spreading ofnets*2Liid the Infidel Vol- 
ney tells us its commerce had declined to a trifling fishery; 
but even that implies some few resident inhabitants. Kab- 
bah, of Amnion, was to become a stable for camels and a 
couching place for flocks f Lord Lindsay reports that " he 
could not sleep amidst its ruins for the bleating of sheep, 
that the dung of camels covers the ruins of its palaces, and 
that the only building left entire in its Acropolis is used as 
a sheepfold."| Yet sheepfolds imply that the tents of their 
Arab owners are near, and that some human beings would 
occasionally reside near its ruins. But desolation, solitude, 
and utter abandonment to the wild beasts of the desert is 
the specific and clearly predicted doom of the world's proud 
capital. The most expressive symbols are selected from 
the desert to portray its desertion. 

"Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chal- 
dees y excellency, shall be as when God overthreio Sodom and 
Gomorrah. It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be 
dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the 
Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make 
their fold there: but wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; 
and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls 
shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there. And the 
wild beasts of (he islands shall cry in their- desolate houses, 
and dragon* in their pleasant palaces 

Every traveler attests the fulfillment of this strange pre- 
diction. "It is a tenantless and desolate metropolis," says 

* Ezekiel, chap. xxvi. 

t Ezekiel, chap. xxv. 

% Lindsay's Travels, II. 78, 117. 

§ Isaiah, chap. xiii. 

16 



242 



PROPHECY. 



Mignon; who, though fully armed; and attended by six 
Arabs, could not induce them by any reward to pass the 
night among its ruins, from the apprehension of evil spirits. 
So completely fulfilled is the prophecy, " The Arabian shall 
not pitch his tent there." The same voice which called 
camels and flocks to the palaces of Eabbah, summoned a 
very different class of tenants for the palaces of Babylon. 
Eabbah was to be a sheepfold, Babylon a menagerie of wild 
beasts ; a very specific difference, and very improbable. One 
of the later Persian kings, however, after it was destined 
and deserted, repaired its walls, converted it into a vast 
hunting-ground, and stocked it with all manner of wild 
beasts; and to this day the apes of the Spice Islands, and 
the lions of the African deserts, meet in its palaces, and 
howl their testimony to the truth of God's Word. Sir B. 
K. Porter saw two majestic lions in the Mujelibe (the ruins 
of the palace), and Eraser thus describes the chambers of 
fallen Babylon: " There were dens of wild beasts in various 
places, and Mr. Bich perceived in some a strong smell, like 
that of a lion. Bones of sheep and other animals were 
seen in the cavities, with numbers of bats and owls." 

Various destructions were predicted for Babylon, U I 
willmahe it a habitation for the bittern, and pools of water,"* 
says one prophecy. u Hcr cities are a desolation, a dry land, 
and a loildemess,"^ says another. How can such contra- 
dictions be true? says the scoffer. 

But the scoffer's contradiction is a fact. God can cause 
the most discordant agencies to agree in effecting his pur- 
pose. Babylon is alternately an overflowed swamp, from 
the inundations of the obstructed Euphrates, and an arid 
desert, under the scorching rays of an Eastern sun. Says 
Mignon: "Morasses and ponds tracked the ground in va- 



* Isaiah, chap. xiv. 
t Jeremiah, chap. li. 



PROPHECY. 



243 



rious places. For a long time after the subsiding of the 
Euphrates great part of this place is little better than a 
swamp." At another season it was "a dry waste and burn- 
ing plain." Even at the same period, "one part on the 
western side is low and marshy, and another an arid desert."* 

Another, and widely different agent, to be employed in 
the destruction of the great center of tyranny and idolatry, 
is thus specifically and definitely indicated in the predic- 
tion : "Behold, I am against thee, destroying mountain, 
saith the Lord, which destroy est all the earth: and I will 
stretch out my hand. upon thee, and roll thee down from the 
rocks, and will make thee a burnt mountain And they shall 
not take of thee a stone for a corner, nor a stone for foun- 
dations; but thou shall be desolate forever, saith the Isord.""f 

"There is one fact," says Fraser, "in connection with the 
most remarkable of these relics (the Birs Nimrod), which 
we can not dismiss without a few more observations. All 
travelers who have ascended the Birs have taken notice of 
the singular heaps of brick-work scattered on the summit of 
this mound, at the foot of the remnant of the wall still 
standing. To the writer they appeared the most striking of 
all the ruins. That they have undergone the most violent 
action of fire is evident from the complete vitrification which 
has taken place in many of the masses. Yet how a heat suffi- 
cient to produce such an effect could have been applied at 
such a height from the ground is unaccountable. They now 
lie on a spot elevated two hundred feet above the plain, and 
must have fallen from some much more lofty position, for 
the structure which still remains, and of which they may be 
supposed originally to have formed a part, bears no marks 
of fire. The building originally can not have contained any 
great proportion of combustible materials, and to produce 

* Mignon, 139. 

t Jeremiah, chap. li. 



244 



PROPHECY. 



so intense a heat by substances carried to such an elevation 
would have been almost impossible, for want of space to 
pile them on. Nothing, we should be inclined to say, short 
of the most powerful action of electric fire, could have pro- 
duced the complete, yet circumscribed, fusion which is here 
observed. Although fused into a solid mass, the courses of 
bricks are still visible, identifying them with the standing 
pile above, but so hardened by the power of heat, that it is 
almost impossible to break off the smallest piece; and, 
though porous in texture, and full of air-holes and cavities, 
like other bricks, they require, on being submitted to the 
stone-cutter's lathe, the same machinery as is used to dress 
the hardest pebbles."* 

The doom of Nineveh, the great rival and predecessor of 
Babylon, was also predicted as the result of two apparently 
contradictory agencies— an overrunning flood and a consum- 
ing fire. But both these antagonistic elements conspired to 
devour her. The river, with an overrunning flood, swept 
away a large portion of the walls. The besiegers entered 
through the breach, and set the city on fire. The charcoal, 
burnt beans, and slabs of half-calcined alabaster, in the 
British Museum, demonstrate the fulfillment of the predic- 
tion. 

Egypt was to be reduced to slavery and degradation, 
Babylonia to utter barrenness and desolation ; but a differ- 
ent and still more incredible doom is pronounced in the 
Bible upon Judea and its people. The land was to be emp- 
tied of its people, and remain uncultivated, retaining all its 
former fertility, while the people were to be scattered over 
all the earth, yet never to lose their distinct nationality, nor 
be amalgamated with their neighbors: " I will make your 
cities waste, and bring your sanctuaries unto desolation, and I 
will not smell the savor of your sweet odors And I will 

* Eraser's Mesopotamia, page 145. 



PROPHECY. 



245 



bring the land into desolation: and your enemies which dwell 
therein shall be astonished at it. And I loill scatter you 
among the heathen., and ivill draw out a sword after you: 
and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste. Then 
shall the land enjoy her Sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, 
and ye be in your enemies' land; even then shall the land 
rest, and enjoy her Sabbaths."* " Until the cities be wasted 
without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land 
be utterly desolate, and the Lord have removed men far away, 
and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. But 
yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be 
eaten: as a teil-tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in 
them, when they cast their leaves." f 11 The generation to come 
of your children that shall rise up after you, and the stranger 
that shall come from a far land, shall say, * * * 
Wherefore hath the Lord done thus unto this land? What 
mcaneth the heat of this great anger? "J 

It is superfluous to adduce proof of the undeniable and 
acknowledged fulfillment of these predictions, but as an ex- 
ample of the way in which God causes scoffers to fulfill the 
prophecies, let us again hear Volney: "I journeyed in the 
empire of the Ottomans, and traversed the provinces which 
were formerly the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria. I enu- 
merated the kingdoms of Damascus and Idumea, of Jeru- 
salem and Samaria. This Syria, said I to myself, now al- 
most depopulated, then contained a hundred flourishing 
cities, and abounded with towns, villages, and hamlets. 
What has become of so many productions of the hand of 
man? What has become of those ages of abundance and 
of life? Great God! from whence proceed such melancholy 
revolutions? For what, cause is the fortune of these coun- 
tries so strikingly changed? Why are so many cities de- 

* Leviticus, chap. xxvi. 

t Isaiah, chap. vi. 

X Deuteronomy, chap. xxix. 



246 



PROPHECY. 



stroyedf Why is not that ancient population reproduced 
and perpetuated ? A mysterious God exercises his incom- 
prehensible judgments. He has doubtless pronounced a 
secret malediction against the earth. He has struck with a 
curse the present race of men in revenge of past genera- 
tions."* The malediction is no secret to any who will read 
the twenty-ninth chapter of Deuteronomy; nor is the aveng- 
ing of the quarrel of God's covenant confined to the sins of 
past generations. The philosopher who would understand 
the fates of cities and empires should read the prophecies. 

The Word of God specifies no less distinctly and defi- 
nitely the destiny of the Jewish than of the Babylonian 
capital, but fixes on a widely different kind of destruction. 
Babylon was never to be built again, but devoted to solitude ; 
busy Tyre to become a place for spreading nets; the cara- 
vans, which once brought the wealth of India through 
Petra, were to cease, and the doom was to " cut off him that 
passeth by and him that returneth." But Jerusalem, it 
was predicted, should long feel the miseries of a multitude 
of oppressors, should never enjoy the luxury of a solitary 
woe, but "be trodden down of the Gentiles." f Saracens, 
Tartars, Turks, and Crusaders, Gentiles from every nation 
of the earth, fulfilled the prediction of old, even as hosts 
of pilgrims from all parts of the earth do at this day. 

So minute and specific are the predictions of Scripture, 
that the fate of particular buildings is accurately defined. 
One temple to the living God, and only one, raised its walls 
in this world, which he had made for his worship. Its fre- 
quenters perverted it from its proper use of leading them 
to confess their sinfulness, to seek pardon through the 
promised Savior to whom its ceremonies pointed, and to 
learn to be holy, as the God of that temple was holy. They 

* Volney's Ruins of Empires, Book I. 
t Luke, chap. xxi. 



PROPHECY. 



247 



hoped that the holiness of the place would screen them in 
the indulgence of pride, formality, and wickedness. The 
temple of the Lord, instead of the Lord of the temple, was 
the object of their veneration. But the doom went forth, 
" Therefore for your sakes shall Zion be plowed as a field, 
and Jerusalem shall become as heaps, and the mountain of 
the house like the high places of the forest." History has 
preserved, and the Jews to this day curse the name of the 
soldier, Tcrentius Rufus, who plowed up the foundations of 
the temple. It long continued in this state. But the Em- 
peror Julian the Apostate conceived the idea of falsifying 
the prediction of Jesus, " Behold your house is left unto you 
desolate"* and sent his friend Alypius, with a Roman army, 
and abundant treasure, to rebuild it. The Jews flocked 
from all parts to assist in the work. Spades and pickaxes 
of silver were provided by the vanity of the rich, and the 
rubbish was transported in mantles of silk and purple. But 
they were obliged to desist from the attempt, for "horrible 
balls of fire breaking out from the foundations with repeated 
attacks, rendered the place inaccessible to the scorched 
workmen, and the element driving them to a distance from 
time to time, the enterprise was dropped. "f Such is the 
testimony of a heathen, confirmed by Jews and Christians. 
The inclosures of the mosque of Omar, forbidding them all 
access to the spot on which it stood, leave it desolate to the 
J ews to this day. I have seen them (in 1872) kissing a few 
large stones, supposed to belong to its foundations or sub- 
structures, from the outside ; for which miserable privilege 
they were obliged to pay their oppressors. On approaching 
the spot from the Zion gate, right across Mount Zion to the 
temple ruins, our way lay through a plowed field of young 
barley, and gardens of cauliflowers hedged with enormous 
rows of cactus. To this day Zion is plowed as a field. 

* Micah, chap. iii. Matthew, chap. xxii. 
t Ammianus Marcellus, 23d chap. I. 



248 



PROPHECY. 



4. No sane man can believe that such minute and accu- 
rate predictions of various and improbable events could be 
the result of human calculations ; yet there is another fea- 
ture of the Bible prophecies still farther removed beyond 
the reach of human sagacity, and that is, remarkable and 
unaccountable preservation amidst the general ruin. If, as 
skeptics allege, destruction is the natural and inevitable 
doom, then preservation is supernatural and miraculous — a 
miracle of divine power controlling nature ; and its predic- 
tion is a miracle of divine wisdom. Now the prophecies of 
the Bible contain several very definite, and widely different 
predictions of the preservation of people and cities from the 
general destruction. We shall refer in this case also to 
those of whose fulfillment there can be no manner of doubt, 
for the facts are palpable and undeniable at the present day. 

The prediction of the character and fate of the Arabs 
stands out a remarkable contrast to the predictions of the 
destruction of the surrounding nations. Of their ances- 
tor, Ishmael, it was predicted: " He will be a wild man ; his 
hand shall be against every man, and every man's hand 
against him ; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his 
brethren."* The nomade and warlike habits of the sons of 
Ishmael are here distinctly predicted ; and the singular an- 
omaly which exempts them alone, of all the people of the 
earth, from the law, " They that take the sword, shall per- 
ish by the sword." The unconquered Arab laughs alike at 
the Persian, Greek, Roman, Turkish, and French invaders 
of his deserts, levies tribute on all who enter his territory, 
and dwells to-day, a free man, in the presence of all his 
brethren, as G-od foretold. 

Of the Israelitish nation G-od predicted, that it should be 
a peculiar, distinct people, separate from the other nations 
of the world : " Lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall 

* Genesis, chap. xvi. 12. 



PROPHECY. 



249 



not be reckoned among the nations."* In apparent contra- 
diction to this separation, he further threatened to punish 
them for their sins, by dispersing them over the world : "/ 
will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a 
sword after you. ,, 'f 11 For lo, I will command, and I will 
sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is 
sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the last grain fall upon the 
earth.' 't It was further threatened, as if to make sure of 
their national destruction : "And among these nations shalt 
thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: 
but the Lord shall give thee there a trembling heart, and fail- 
ing of eyes, and sorrow of mind : and thy life shall hang in 
doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and 
shalt have none assurance of thy Ufe."§ Contrary to all ap- 
pearances, and in spite of all this dispersion and persecu- 
tion, it is predicted that Israel shall still exist as a nation, 
and be restored to the favor of God, and that prosperity 
which ever accompanies it: u And yet for all that, when they 
be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, 
neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to 
break my covenant with them : for I am the Lord their 
Qod>"\\ 

Here are four distinct predictions, of national peculiarity, 
universal dispersion, grievous oppression, and remarkable 
preservation. The fulfillment is obvious, and undeniable. 
You need no commentary to explain it. Go into any cloth- 
ing-store on Western Row, or into the synagogue in Broad- 
way, and you will see it. The Infidel is sorely perplexed 
to give any account of this great phenomenon. How does 
it happen that this singular people is dispersed over all the 

* Numbers, chap, xxiii. 
t Leviticus, chap. xxvi. 
X Amos, chap. ix. 
\ Deuteronomy, chap, xxviii. 
|| Leviticus, chap. xxvi. 



250 



PROPHECY. 



earth, and yet distinct and unamalgainated with any other? 
How does it happen that for eighteen hundred years they 
have resisted all the influences of nature, and all the cus- 
toms of society, and all the powers of persecution, driving 
them toward amalgamation, and irresistible in all other in- 
stances I In the face of the power of the Chinese Empire, 
in spite of the tortures of the Spanish Inquisition, amid 
the chaos of African nationalities, and the fusion of Amer- 
ican democracy, in the plains of Australia, and in the streets 
of San Francisco, the religion, customs, and physiognomy 
of the children of Israel are as distinct this day as they 
were three thousand years ago, when Moses wrote them in 
the Pentateuch, and Shishak painted them on the tombs of 
Medinct Abou. How does the Infidel account for it? It 
will not do to allege the favorite story about purity of blood 
and Caucasian race ; for the question is, How does it happen 
that this people, and this people alone, have kept the blood 
pure ; while all other races are so mingled that no other 
race can be found pure on earth ? Besides, lest any should 
suppose such a cause sufficient for their preservation, an- 
other nation, descended from the same father and the same 
mother — the children of J acob's twin brother — has utterly 
perished, and there is not any remaining of the house of 
Esau. 

Human sagacity, with all the facts before its face, can 
not give any rational account of the causes of this anomaly. 
It can not tell to-day why this people exists separate from, 
and scattered through all nations, from Kamschatka to New 
Zealand ; how, then, could it foretell, three thousand years 
ago, this singular exception to all the laws of national exist- 
ence? While the sun and moon endure, the nation of 
Israel shall exist as Grod's witness to Grod's word, an unde- 
niable proof that the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it. 

A very peculiar feature of the desolation of Israel was 
the desolation, but not the destruction of the cities. In most 



PROPHECY. 



251 



cases of the desolations of war, the cities have been burned 
and the buildings destroyed. There is no shelter for man 
or beast in the mounds of rubbish which cover the ruined 
cities of Assyria. Where the buildings have not been de- 
stroyed, or have been rebuilt, they have again been inhab- 
ited ; as we see in the cases of Rome, Constantinople, Jeru- 
salem, and many others. But on the cities of Israel it was 
written that God's curse should go forth " till the cities 
should be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses with- 
out man, and the land be left utterly desolate." But for a 
long time the literal fulfillment of this prediction was not 
witnessed, as the cities on this side the Jordan had been 
mostly reduced to ruins. The richest and most populous 
part of the land, however, was the land of Bashan ; where, 
in a territory of about thirty miles by twenty, sixty cities 
still remain standing to attest the wonderful fertility of the 
soil and industry of the people. "And though the vast 
majority of them are deserted, they are not ruined. * * * 
Many of the houses in the ancient cities of Bashan are per- 
fect, as if only finished yesterday. The walls are sound, the 
roofs unbroken, the doors, and even the window shutters in 
their places."* From two hundred to five hundred houses 
have been found perfect in some of these cities ; and from 
the roof of the Castle of Salcah, Dr. Porter counted thirty 
towns and villages dotting the plain, many of them perfect 
as when first built; "yet for more than five centuries there 
has not been an inhabitant in one of them." So sure is 
every word of God. 

Take another instance of preservation, so remarkable 
amid the surrounding destruction, that it arrested the atten- 
tion and admiration of the author of the Decline and Fall 
of the Roman Empire, skeptic and scoffer though he was. 

The seven churches of seven of the most considerable 

* Porter's Giant Cities of Bashan, passim. 



252 



PROPHECY. 



cities of Asia were then, as the churches of Christ still are, 
the salt of the earth. Ten righteous men would have 
averted God's judgments from Sodom. Jesus pronounced 
the sentences of these churches seventeen hundred and 
sixty years ago, and the present condition of the cities at- 
tests the divine authority of the record containing them. 
They are various and specific. Three were to be utterly de- 
stroyed. Against two no special threatening is denounced. 
To the remaining two promises of life and blessing are given. 

Ephesus, famous for its magnificence, the busy avenue of 
travel, the seat of the temple of Diana, long the residence 
of an apostle, and afterward of Christian bishops — " one of 
the eyes of Asia" — as it stood first on the roll of cities, 
first receives the doom of abused privileges : 11 1 ivill remove 
thy candlestick out of its place, unless thou repent " 

Says Gibbon : " The captivity and ruin of the seven 
churches of Asia was consummated (by the Ottomans) A. 
D. 1312 ; and the barbarous lords of Ionia and Lydia still 
trample on the monuments of classic and Christian antiquity. 
In the loss of Ephesus the Christians deplored the fall of 
the first angel, and the extinction of the first candlestick of 
the Revelation. The desolation is complete, and the temple 
of Diana or the church of Mary will equally elude the 
search of the curious traveler. 1 '* 

Since Gibbon's day the foundations of the temple have 
been discovered twelve to fourteen feet below the soil ; but 
no church of Christ remains to illuminate the minds of the 
few squalid and lazy dwellers in the village of Aisayalouk. 
One cobbler's stall represented the whole manufacturing 
industry of Ephesus; and four boys playing a game like 
drafts, with pebbles, in front of it seemed the only public 
likely to patronize its theater, as I took note of its people 
and their occupations, in 1872. Then leaving the storks 



* Decline and Fall, chap. lxiv. 



PROPHECY. 



253 



in their nests, on the top of the ruined arches of its great 
aqueduct, to proceed toward the ruins of the great theater, 
we tried in vain to procure horses or asses for the ladies ; 
found the only road so filled with water from the recent 
rains as to be impassable, and were fain to plunge on foot 
through the plowed fields till we reached the elevation on 
which it was erected. Here we surveyed its rock-hewn 
seats, capable of accommodating an audience larger than 
that of all the theaters of New York; but there was no 
longer a voice to cry, "Great is Diana of the Ephesians!" 
The sea has forsaken the harbor, which is now a pestilen- 
tial morass. We passed through the ruins of the custom- 
house, now miles inland, and found a single Turkish soldier 
on guard. The peasants who cultivate some parts of the 
plain come from distant villages, and fever, filth, and beg- 
gary reign in Ephesus. 

Had the twenty thousand patrons of the drama, in the thir- 
ty-one theaters of New York, honored the theater of Laodi- 
cea with their presence, its polite citizens would have accom- 
modated them all on the reserved seats, retiring themselves 
to ten thousand less commodious sittings, and to two less 
gigantic theaters. While yet busy in the erection of their 
splendid places of public amusement, Jesus said, "I will 
spew thee out of my mouth " "The circus, and three stately 
theaters of Laodicea, arc peopled with wolves and foxes," 
says Gibbon. 

The church was spewed out of Christ's mouth, and the 
city too. It has been overturned by earthquakes, and is 
now nothing but a series of magnificent ruins, from which, 
however, ample evidence may be collected of its former 
magnificence. Those of the aqueduct, the theater, and the 
amphitheater, are remarkable ; in the latter an inscription 
has been found showing that it was in course of erection 
when the Lord dictated the warning to its people. But the 
warning was unheeded, and now the whole space inside the 



254 



PROPHECY. 



city walls is strewn with fragments of columns and pedes- 
tals. 

A Lydian capitalist once deposited in the vaults of Sardis 
more specie than is now in circulation in this whole conti- 
nent. But Jesus said, " Thou hast a name that thou livest 
and art dead. If, therefore, thou shalt not watch, I will 
come upon thee as a thief \ and thou shalt not 7cnou) what hour 
I will come upon thee" 

" Sardis," says Gibbon, "is a miserable village." A later 
writer (Durbin) tells us that the Turks say, "Every one 
who builds a house in Sardis dies soon, and avoid the spot." 
Arundell, in his account of his visit to the seven churches, 
says: "If I were asked what impresses the mind most 
strongly on beholding Sardis, I should say, its indescribable 
solitude, like the darkness of Egypt, that could be felt. So 
deep the solitude of the spot, once the lady of kingdoms, 
produces a feeling of desolate abandonment in the mind 
which can never be forgotten." Connect this feeling with 
the message of the Apocalypse to the church of Sardis, 
" Thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead, and then 
look around and ask, Where are the churches ? Where are 
the Christians of Sardis? The tumuli beyond the Hermus 
reply, 'All dead!' — suffering the infliction of the threat- 
ened judgment of Grod for the abuse of their privileges. 
Let the unbeliever, then, be asked, Is there no truth in 
prophecy? — no reality in religion?" 

Only twenty-seven miles north of this desolate metrop- 
olis, the manufactories of Thyatira dispatch weekly to 
Smyrna, cloths, as famous over Asia for the brilliancy and 
durability of their hues as those which Lydia displayed to 
the admiration of the ladies of Philippi. Two thousand 
two hundred Greek Christians, two hundred Armenian, and 
a Protestant Church under the care of the missionaries of 
the American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions, 
assemble every Sabbath to commemorate the resurrection of 



PROPHECY. 



255 



Him who said to the church of Thyatira: 11 1 will put upon 
you no other burden; but that which ye have already hold 
fast till I come." 

The fragrant citron {Bergamot) still nourishes around the 
birthplace of Gralen ; but the ruins of the famous library of 
200,000 manuscripts are far less durable memorials of the city 
of booksellers than those beautifully dressed skins, which, 
taking their name (Pergamena) from the place of their man- 
ufacture, will preserve the name and fame of Pergamos as 
long as parchment can preserve man's memorials, or Grod's 
predictions. Though famous for fragrance, physic, and 
philosophy, Pergamos was infamous for idolatry, licentious- 
ness, and persecution; yet still endeared to Jesus as the 
scene of the martyrdom of faithful Antipas, and the dwell- 
ing-place of a hidden church; and widely different sen- 
tences are recorded against those opposite classes. The 
public memorials are to perish, but the hidden word to en- 
dure. "The fanes of Jupiter and Diana, and Venus and 
Esculapius (worshiped under the symbol of a live snake), 
were prostrate in the dust, and where they had not been 
carried away by the Turks to cut up into tombstones or 
pounded into mortar, the Corinthian columns and the Ionic, 
the splendid capitals, the cornices and the pediments, all in 
the highest ornament, were thrown in unsightly heaps,"* 
is the comment on the threatening of Jesus, " I will fight 
against them — the idolaters — with the sword of my mouth " 
The 3,000 Greek and 300 Armenian Christians, and even 
the 10,000 Turkish inhabitants of the modern Pergamos, 
have received hundreds of copies of the promise, u To him 
that overcometh will I gioe to eat of the hidden manna, and 
will give him a white stone and in the stone a new name writ- 
ten, which no man Jcnoioeth, saving he that receiveth it." But 
whether the hidden church of Pergamos shine forth or not, 

* Macfarlane's Seven Apocalyptic Churches. 



256 



PROPHECY. 



Gibbon was inaccurate in stating, in the face of facts, that 
" the god of Mohammed without a rival is invoked in the 
mosques of Pergamos and Thyatira," (rod's providence is 
as discriminating as his prophecy, though unbelief may 
overlook both. 

We have noted here instances of the prediction of re- 
markable destruction to Sardis, Ephesus, and Laodicea; of 
continued existence to Pergamos and Thyatira; let us now 
note a prediction of remarkable escape and preservation 
from the universal doom. If it requires no inspiration to 
prophecy destruction — the universal fate of humanity, ac- 
cording to the Infidel — surely it requires more than human 
skill to say that any city shall escape this universal fate, and 
more than human power to avert this destruction. Of Phil- 
adelphia, but twenty- five miles distant from the ruins of 
Sardis, Jesus said, and the Bible records the prophecy: 11 1 
know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, 
and no man can shut it : for thou hast a little strength, and 
hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name. Behold, 
I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they 
are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them 
to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have 
loved thee. Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, 
I will also keep thee from the hour of temptation, which 
shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon 
the earth. Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which 
thou hast, that no man take thy crown. Him that overcom- 
eth will I make a pillar in the temple of my God; and he 
shall go no more out: and I will torite upon him the name 
of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is 
New Jerusalem, ivhich cometh down out of heaven from my 
God: and I will write upon him my new name." 

" Philadelphia alone," says Gribbon, "has been saved by 
prophecy, or courage. At a distance from the sea, forgot- 
ten by the emperors, encompassed on all sides by the Turks, 



PROPHECY. 



257 



her valiant sons defended their religion and their freedom 
alone for fourscore years, and at length capitulated with the 
proudest of the Ottomans. Among the Greek colonies and 
churches of Asia, Philadelphia is still erect — a column in a 
scene of ruins — a pleasing example that the paths of honor 
and safety may be the same." 

In the pages of this eloquent writer it would be hard to 
discover another instance of unqualified hearty commenda- 
tion of soldiers or sufferers for Christianity and liberty, such 
as Gibbon here bestows on Philadelphia's valiant sons. But 
it was written, " I will make them come and worship before 
thy feet," and the skeptic and scoffer must fulfill the word 
of Jesus ; even as the unbelieving Mohammedan also does, 
when he writes upon it the modern name, Allah Sehr — The 
City of God A majestic solitary pillar, of high antiquity, 
arrests the eye of the traveler, and reminds the worshipers 
in the six modern churches of Philadelphia of the beauty 
and faithfulness of the prophetic, symbol. Heaven and 
earth shall pass away, but Jesus' word shall not pass away. 

Improbable to human sagacity as this preservation must 
have seemed, the resurrection of a fallen city is more ut- 
terly beyond man's vision. In the Bible, however, tribula- 
tion and recovery were foretold to Smyrna: u Fear none of 
those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall 
cast some of you into prison that ye may be tried; and ye 
shall have tribulation ten days. Be thou faithful unto death, 
and I will give thee a croion of life" "The populousness 
of Smyrna is owing to the foreign trade of the Franks and 
Armenians," says the scoffer. No matter to what it is ow- 
ing, he who dictated the Bible foresaw it, and made no 
mistake in foretelling it. Says Arundell: This, the other 
eye of Asia, is still a very flourishing commercial city, one 
of the very first in the present Turkish empire in wealth 
and population, containing 130,000 inhabitants. The con- 
17 



258 



PROPHECY. 



tinued importance of Smyrna may be estimated from the 
fact that it is the seat of a consul from every nation in 
Europe. The prosperity of Smyrna is now rather on the 
increase than the decline, and the houses of painted wood, 
which were most unworthy of its ancient fame and present 
importance, are rapidly giving way to palaces of stone ris- 
ing in all directions; and, probably, ere many years have 
passed, the modern town may not unworthily represent the 
ancient city, which the ancients delighted to call the crown 
of Ionia. Commercial activity and architectural beauty, 
however, are but a small part of the glorious destiny of the 
community to which Jesus says, " I will give thee a crown 
of life." 

Mark Twain suggests that the prophecy refers to the 
church, rather than to the city; but forgets to remind us 
that the Church of Christ is well represented and crowned 
with life in Smyrna. Grod's predictions regard the vital part 
of communities, the spiritual forces ; these, vigorous and out- 
spreading, secure the material progress. Close the Bible 
House, printing presses, and schools of America, and real 
estate would not be worth much more than in Asia. The 
Lord Christ rules this world. His blessing has revived both 
the church and the city of Smyrna, according to his prom- 
ise. In 1872 I found its harbor busy with coasting craft 
and ocean steamers, and its railroad doing a brisk business. 
Smyrna is a live city. 

Deliverance from the curse of sin, and communion with 
the Lord of Life, alone can secure either a nation's or an 
individual's immortality. Smyrna possesses the gospel of 
salvation. Several devoted English and American mission- 
aries proclaim salvation to its citizens. From its printing 
presses thousands of copies of the Word of Life issue to all 
the various populations of the Turkish Empire. A living 
Church of Christ in Smyrna holds forth, for the acceptance 
of the dying nations around her, that crown of life prom- 



PROPHECY. 



259 



ised and granted by the Word of God, not to her only, but 
to all who love his appearing and his kingdom. 

5. This is the grand distinction of God's word of proph- 
ecy, that it is the Word of Life. It is the only word which 
promises life, the only word which bestows it on fallen hu- 
manity. Kecognizing no inevitable law of destruction but 
the sentence of God, no invariable law of nature superior 
to the counsel of J ehovah, nor any progress of events which 
his Almighty arm can not arrest and reverse, it points a de- 
spairing world to sin as the cause of all destruction, to Satan 
as the author of sin, to ungodly men in league with him as 
the foes of God and man, and to Christ pledged to perpetual 
warfare with such until the last enemy be destroyed. This 
word of prophecy tells us, that the battle-fields Messiah has 
won are earnests of that great victory ; points to the col- 
umns which he has preserved erect amid scenes of ruin, as 
assurances that he is able to save to the uttermost all that 
come unto God by him ; goes to the graveyards where fallen 
Smyrnas, idolatrous Saxons, debased Sandwich Islanders, 
and cannibal New Zealanders have buried the image of the 
living God, and in Jesus' name proclaims, "/ am the resur- 
rection and the life : he that believeth in me, though he were 
dead, yet shall he live;" and, amid the very ruins of de- 
stroyed cities, and the crumbling heaps of their perished 
memorials, beholds the assurances that Satan's rule of ruin 
shall not be perpetual, anticipates the day when the course 
of sin and misery shall be reversed, and teaches Adam's 
sons to face the foe, and chant forth that heaven-born note 
of victorious faith, li Oh, thou enemy! destructions are come 
to a 'perpetual end." 

Come forth, trembling skeptic, from the cave of thy dark 
invariable experience of death and destruction, and from 
the vain sparks of thy misgiving hopes of an' ungodly eter- 
nity to come less miserable than the past, and lift thine eyes 
to this heavenly sunrising on the dark mountain tops of 



260 



PROPHECY. 



futurity, the like of which thou didst never dream of in all 
thy Pantheistic reveries. Search over all the religions of 
the world — the hieroglyphics of Egypt, the arrow-headed 
inscriptions of Assyria, the classic mythologies of graceful 
Greece and iron Rome, the monstrous shasters of thine 
Indian Pundits, or the more chaotic clouds of thy German 
philosophies — in none of them wilt thou ever find this 
divine thought, an end of destructions — a perpetual end. 
Cycles of ruin and renovation, and of renovation and ruin, 
vast cycles, if you will, but evermore ending in dire catas- 
trophies to gods and men — an everlasting succession of death 
and destructions — is the fearful vista which all the religions 
of man, and thine own irreligion, present to thy terrified 
vision. But thou wast created in the image of the living 
God, and durst not rest satisfied with any such prospect. 
Now I come in the name of the Lord to tell thee, that 
" God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten 
Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, hut 
have everlasting life;" and I demand of thee that thou ac- 
knowledge this promise of life everlasting to be the word 
of that living God, and to show cause, if any thou hast, 
why thou dost relinquish thy birthright, and spurn the 
gift of everlasting life which is in Christ Jesus our Lord? 

But, if thou hast no sufficient cause why thou shouldest 
choose death rather than life, then hear, and your soul shall 
live, while I relate the promise which God hath made of old 
to our fathers, and hath fulfilled to us, their children, by ' 
raising up his Son, Jesus Christ, from the dead, and send-; 
ing him to bless you, by turning away every one of you from 
your iniquities. For there can be no deliverance from mis- 
ery and destruction but by means of delivery from sin and 
Satan. 

It is quite in agreement with the manner of our deliver- 
ance from any of the evils of our fallen condition, that our 
deliverance from the power of sin and Satan be effected by 



PROPHECY. 



261 



the agency of a deliverer. Our ignorance is removed by 
the knowledge of a teacher, our sickness by the skill of a 
physician, the oppressed nation hails the advent of a pa- 
triotic leader, and oppressed humanity acknowledges the 
fitness and need of a divine Deliverer, even by the ready 
welcome it has given to pretenders to this character, and by 
the longing desire of the wisest and best of men for a divinely 
commissioned Savior ; a desire implanted by the great proph- 
ecy, which stands at the portal of hope for mankind, in the 
very earliest period of our history, that " the seed of the 
woman should bruise the serpent's head," and so leave man 
triumphant over the great destroyer. 

The prophecies regarding the Messiah are so numerous, 
pointed, various, and improbable, as to set human sagacity 
utterly at defiance ; while they are also connected so as to 
form a scheme of prophecy, which gradually unrolls before 
us the advent, the ministry, the death, resurrection, and as- 
cension of the Lord, the progress of his gospel over all the 
world, and the blessed effects it should produce on individ- 
uals, families, and nations. It closes with a view of the 
second coming of Jesus to conquer the last of his enemies, 
and take possession of the earth as his inheritance. I can 
only lop off a twig or two from this blessed tree of life, in 
the hope that the fragrance of the leaves may allure you to 
take up the Bible, and eat abundantly of its life-giving 
promises. As I have in the previous chapters abundantly 
proved the veracity of the New Testament history, I shall 
now with all confidence refer to its account of the birth, 
life, and death of Jesus, as illustrating the prophecies. 

The time, the place, the manner of his birth, his parent- 
age and reception, were plainly declared, hundreds of years 
before he appeared. 

When Herod had gathered all the chief priests and 
scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where 
Christ should be born, and they said unto him ; "In Beth- 



262 



PROPHECY. 



lehem of J udea, for thus it is written by the prophet : And 
thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, art not the least 
among the princes of Judah: for out of thee shall come a 
Governor, that shall rule my people Israel." The first verse 
of this chapter records the fact, " Now when Jesus was born 
in Bethlehem of Judea." 

The throne of Judah was to be occupied by strangers, j 
and the line of native princes was to cease upon the coming ! 
of this Governor, and not till his coming : " The scepter shall 
not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his 
feet, until Shiloh shall come; and unto him shall the gath- 
ering of the people be." On the day of his crucifixion the 
rulers of the Jews made this formal and public announce- 
ment of the fact, "We have no king but Caesar." 

He was to address a class of people whom no other relig- 
ious teacher had condescended to notice before, and very 
few save those sent by Him ever since : " The Spirit of the 
Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me 
to preach good tidings unto the meek : he hath sent me to bind 
up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and 
the opening of the prison to them that are bound " Hear 
Jesus' words: "Come unto me, all ye that labor and are 
heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Gro and show John 
again those things which ye do hear and see : The blind re- 
ceive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, 
and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have 
the gospel preached to them. And blessed is he, whosoever ^ 
shall not be offended in me." 

Yet, notwithstanding his feeding of thousands, and heal- 
ing of multitudes, and teaching of the lowest of the people, 
it was foretold he should be unpopular : u He is despised and 
rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with 
grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was 
despised, and we esteemed him not." The brief records are : 
" Then all the disciples forsook him and fled." " Then be- 



PROPHECY. 



2G3 



gan Peter to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the 
man." " Pilate saith unto them, Ye have a custom, that I 
• should release unto you one at the passover : will ye there- 
fore that I release unto you the King of the J ews ? Then 
cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. 
Now Barabbas was a robber." 

All the prophets agree in predicting that for the sins of 
his people, and to atone for their guilt, he should be put to 
death by a shameful public execution : "In the midst of the 
week Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself. He was 
wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our ini- 
quities : the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and 
vrith his stripes ice are healed. He was numbered with the 
transgi'essors ; and he bare the sin of many, and made inter- 
cession for the transgressors. They pierced my hands and 
my feet." The record says : " The Son of Man came not 
to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life 
a ransom for many." "And when they were come to the place 
which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the 
malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the 
left. Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know 
not what they do " 

The one grand unparalleled fact, one which demands the 
hope of dying men for a victory over the great destroyer, 
and a resurrection from the tomb — the fact that one man 
born of a woman died, and did not see corruption, but rose 
again from the dead and went up into heaven, and dieth no 
more — forms the theme of many a prophetic psalm of tri- 
umph : " Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, nor wilt thou 
give thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou wilt show me 
the path of life. Thou wilt make me full of joy with thy 
countenance. Thou hast ascended on high. Thou hast led 
captivity captive.'" Often did Jesus predict this prodigy 
before friend and foe : "Sir, toe remember that that deceiver 
said, lohen he was yet alive, After three days J will rise again." 



264 



PROPHECY. 



The last chapters of the gospels relate the proofs by which 
he convinced his incredulous disciples that the prophecy 
was fulfilled : " Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I 
myself. Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and 
bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, 
he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they 
yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he saith unto them, 
Have ye here any meat ? And they gave him a piece of 
broiled fish, and of an honey comb. And he took it and 
did eat before them ; and said unto them, Thus it is writ- 
ten, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from 
the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission 
of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, 
beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these 
things. And behold I send the promise of my Father upon 
you, but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be en- 
dued with power from on high. And he led them out as far 
as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands and blessed them. 
And while he was blessing them he was parted from them, 
and carried up into heaven. And while they looked stead- 
fastly toward heaven, as he went up, behold two men stood 
by them in white apparel, which said, Ye men of Galilee, 
why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, 
which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in 
like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." 

With your own eyes you shall see the fulfillment of this 
prophecy. Every eye shall see him. The clouds of heaven 
shall then reveal the vision now sketched on the page of 
revelation : a And I saw a great white throne, and Him that 
sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled 
away, and there was found no place for them. And I saw 
the dead, small and great, stand before God ; and the books 
were opened ; and another book was opened, which is the 
Book of Life ; and the dead were judged out of those 
things which were written in the books, according to their 



PROPHECY. 



205 



works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it ; 
and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in 
them; and they were judged every man according to their 
works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. 
This is the second death. And whosoever was not found 
written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. 
And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first 
heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was 
no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, New Jerusa- 
lem, coming down from God, out of heaven, prepared as a 
bride adorned for her husband. And T heard a great voice 
out of heaven, saying, Behold the tabernacle of G-od is with 
men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his 
people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their 
God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes ; 
and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying : 
neither shall there be any more pain ; for the former things 
are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, 
Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, 
Write, for these words are true and faithful." 



CHAPTER IX. 

yVLoSES y^LND J^HE ^ROPHETS, 



In the foregoing chapters we have found, that we have 
great need of God's teaching; that he has sent his Son, 
Jesus Christ, to show us the way of life ; that the gospel 
preached by him and his apostles has proved itself the 
power of God, by saving men from their sins ; and that this 
gospel is truly recorded- in the New Testament. From these 
facts, already settled, we proceed, according to our plan of 
investigation, to examine those which may be more obscure ; 
to examine the Old Testament by the light of the New. 

The great majority of Jews and Christians have always 
believed, that the world was in as great need of God's teach- 
ing before the coming of Christ as it has been since ; that 
God did put his words into the mouths of certain persons, 
called prophets; and that he caused them to tell them truly 
to their neighbors ; that he enabled these prophets to make 
predictions of future events beyond the skill of man to cal- 
culate, and to do miracles which the power of man could not 
perform, as proofs that they spake the Word of God ; that 
he caused them truly to record in writing a great many of 
these revelations, and so much of the history of the times 
in which, and of the people to whom, they were given, as 
was needful for a right understanding of them; that he has 
so managed matters since, as that these revelations and nar- 
ratives have been faithfully preserved in the books of the 
Old Testament; that we are bound to believe these revela- 
tions to be true, not because we can otherwise demonstrate 

(266) 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



267 



their truth, but because God, who can not lie, has declared 
it; and that we are bound to do the things they command, 
not merely because we see them to be right, but because 
God commands us. 

It is needful to consider the divine authority of the Old 
Testament distinctly from that of the New, not only because 
it is a distinct subject in itself, and because our plan of in- 
vestigation leads us backward from the known and established 
fact of the divine authority of the New Testament to the 
discovery or disproof of the like character in the Old; but 
because a great many persons admit, in words at least, that 
Christ was a teacher sent from God, who, either in so many 
words, or in effect, deny the divine authority of the Old 
Testament. Some of the modern Rationalists have revived 
the creed of the Gnostics of the first century — that the 
Hebrew Jehovah was a being of very different character 
from the Deity revealed by Jesus Christ. They will extol 
to the skies the world-wide benevolence, compassion and 
kindness of the gospel of Christ, in contrast with the al- 
leged national pride, bigotry, and exclusiveness of the He- 
brew prophets. Others are desirous of appearing remarka- 
bly candid in bestowing on the Old Testament a liberal com- 
mendation as a collection of religious tracts of merely 
human origin, and of various degrees of merit; some of 
them of extraordinary literary excellence, well suited to the 
infancy of the human intellect, and highly useful in their 
time in raising men from fetichism and idolatry to the wor- 
ship of one God ; but which, containing many errors along 
with this grand truth, have been set aside by the more per- 
fect teachings of Christ and his apostles, much in the same 
way as the old Ptolemaic astronomy was displaced by the 
discoveries of Newton. Others still are willing to acknowl- 
edge the Old Testament as inspired, provided we will allow 
Shakespeare and the Koran to be inspired also. Besides 
all these, there are several scores of scholars anxious to con- 



268 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



ceal its nakedness under theories of inspiration made and 
trimmed in a great many styles, but all cut from the same 
doctrine, to-wit, that God revealed his truth aright to Moses 
and the prophets, but they went wrong in the telling of it. 
Now, all these notions are refuted by the fact, that God is 
the Author of the Bible 

When we say that God is the Author of the Bible, and 
that it carries with it a divine authority because it is the 
Word of God, we do not mean that God is the Author of 
every saying in it, and that every sentiment recorded in it 
is God's mind, any more than we mean to make D'Aubigne 
responsible for every sentiment of priests, popes and monks 
which he has faithfully recorded in his History of the Ref- 
ormation. On the contrary, we find, in the very beginning 
of the Bible, a very full expression of the devil's sentiments 
recorded in the devil's own words — Ye shall not surely die — 
and they are not one whit less devilish and lying, though 
recorded in the Bible, than when expounded by any modern 
Universalist preacher. But we mean that it is very true 
that the devil was the preacher of that first Universalist 
sermon : and that God thought it needful to let mankind 
know the shape of the doctrine, the character of the 
preacher, and the consequences of listening to error ; and 
therefore directed Moses to record it truly for the informa- 
tion of ail whom it may concern. So there are many other 
sayings of wicked men, and even of good men, recorded in 
the Bible, which are very false ; but the Bible gives a true 
record of them, by God's direction, that we may not be ig- 
norant of Satan's devices. 

Nor, when we say that God directed the prophets what 
to write, and how to write it, so that they did not go wrong 
in the writing of his word, do we mean that he also so guided 
every piece of their behavior, as that they never went wrong 
in doing their own actions ; nor that the sins of the saints, 
recorded in the Bible, are anything the less sinful for being 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



269 



recorded there, or for being performed by men who ought 
to have known better. There is not a perfect man upon the 
earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not. If the Bible had 
left the faults of its writers undiscovered it would hot have 
been a true history. But these very writers of the Bible 
tell us their own transgressions, under the direction of the 
Spirit of God ; a thing writers in general are very shy 
about. Moses tells us how he spake unadvisedly with his 
lips, and was punished for it. David's penitential psalms 
record the bitter tears he wept over his transgression ; tears 
which could not wash out the sentence against the man after 
God's own heart — the sword shall never depart from thy 
house. An overburdened people, a rotten court, a falling 
empire, continual strife, a family of scolding women, and a 
foolish son — might have been considered sufficient marks of 
God's displeasure, without causing the wisest of men to 
pen, and publish to the world, such a minute record of his 
madness, folly and misery, as we find in Ecclesiastes. But 
these shipwrecked mariners were divinely directed to pile 
up the sad memorials of their errors on the reefs where 
they were wrecked, as beacons of warning to all inexpe- 
rienced voyagers on life's treacherous sea. The light-house 
is built by the same authority as the custom-house, and is 
even more necessary. 

Now let us take note of the objects of our investigation. 
We are not in search of the literary beauty or poetic inspi- 
ration of the Bible ; but we inquire by what right does it 
command our obedience ? Nor are we about to inquire 
whether, when we have tried the Bible at the tribunal of 
our reason, we shall give it a diploma to commend it to the 
patronage of other critics ; but whether it comes to us at- 
tested by such evidence of being the Word of God, that our 
reason shall reverently bow down before it as a higher au- 
thority, and seek light from it by which to judge of all spir- 
itual and moral matters. 



270 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



Attempts are continually made to confuse these great 
questions, by concessions of the literary excellence of the 
Bible, on the part of those who deny its divine authority. 
For instance, one of the modern oracles of infidelity says, 
and his admirers incessantly repeat the grand discovery : 
" The writings of the Prophets contain nothing above the 
reach of the human faculties. Here are noble and spirit- 
stirring appeals to men's conscience, patriotism, honor and 
religion ; beautiful poetic descriptions, odes, hymns, ex- 
pressions of faith almost beyond praise. But the mark of 
human infirmity is on them all, and proofs or signs of mi- 
raculous inspiration are not found in them."* 

But what do the toiling millions of earth care about beau- 
tiful poetic descriptions of a heaven and a hell that have no 
reality ? Or what does it signify to you or me, reader, that 
the Bible raises its head far above the other cedars of 
earthly literature ? If its top reaches not to heaven, can it 
make a ladder long enough to carry us there ? The Bible 
contains predictions beyond the reach of the human facul- 
ties, as we have fully proved. These predictions at least 
are from God, and have no mark of human infirmity on 
them. 

It does not at all meet this question to grant that the 
Bible is inspired, just as every work of genius is inspired ; 
nor to profess that they believe the Bible to be from God, 
just as every pure and holy thought, and every good work, 
proceed from him. When the assertors of the divine au- 
thority of the Bible speak of it as inspired, they mean that 
it is so as no other book is ; and when they speak of it as 
coming from God, they mean that it does not come simply 
as a gift of God's bounty, as the soldier's land-warrant comes 
from the government ; but that it comes like the laws of 



* Parker's Absolute Religion, p. 205. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



271 



Congress, carrying authority with it to command our obedi- 
ence. 

We feel no interest whatever in the discussion of an in- 
spiration, " like God's omnipotence, not limited to the few 
writers claimed by the Jews, Christians and Mohammedans, 
but as extensive as the race ; "* or perhaps as extensive 
as all creation, and leading us to regard even " the solemn 
notes of the screech owl " as inspired, f What manner of 
use could the Bible be to an ignorant soul groping its way 
to truth and holiness, or to a dying sinner hastening to the 
judgment seat of God, if it were true, that " the Bible's 
own teaching on the subject is that everything good in any 
book, person or thing, is inspired ? Milton and Shakespeare, 
and Bacon and the Canticles, the Apocalypse and the Ser- 
mon on the Mount, and the Eighth Chapter of the Romans 
are all inspired. How much inspiration they respectively 
contain must be gathered from their results."! 

This liberal grant of inspiration, alike to Moses and Mo- 
hammed, to Christ and to Shakespeare, is evidently a denial 
of divine authority to any of them. If Hamlet, and the 
Sermon on the Mount, and the Koran, are all of a like di- 
vine authority, or all alike without any, it is merely a mat- 
ter of taste whether I worship at Niblo's or the Tabernacle, 
or keep a harem in my house or a prayer-meeting. Most 
men, however, find it hard to believe that Christ and Mo- 
hammed taught exactly the same religion, or that the 
church and the theater are precisely equal and alike in 
their influences on the heart and life; and so they reject 
several of these inspired men, and cleave to the one they 
like best. Whereas, if this theory be true, they ought 
not to act in such a disrespectful way toward any inspired 
man ; but ought to attend the church, the theater and the 

* Parker's Discourses on Eeligion, p. 161. 

t Macknight's Doctrine of Inspiration, p. 161, and seq. 

% Macknight's Doctrine of Inspiration, p. 192, etc. 



272 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS 



harem with equal regularity, and serve God, Mammon and 
Belial with equal diligence. 

"Oh," it is replied, "they are not all inspired in the same 
degree. It does not follow that because Byron, and Shakes- 
peare, and Paul are all inspired, that their writings will 
produce exactly the same results, or that they are alike suit- 
able for every constitution and temper. How much inspi- 
ration they severally possess must be determined by their 
results. The tree is known by its fruits ; and experience is 
the price of truth." 

But truth may be bought too dear. I am sick and need 
some medicine, but know not exactly what kind, or how 
much to take. "Here," says my Rationalist friend, "is a 
whole drug store for you. Every drawer, and pot, and bot- 
tle is full of medicine. Help yourself." But, my good sir, 
how am I to know what kind will suit me? There are poi- 
sons here, as well as medicines; and I can not tell the dif- 
ference between arsenic and calomel. One of my neighbors 
died the other day from swallowing oxalic acid instead of 
Glauber's salts. Be kind enough to put the poisons on one 
shelf, and the medicines on the other, or, at least, to label 
them, so that I may know which to choose and which to 
refuse. "Oh," says my Rationalist friend, "this distinction 
between medicines and poisons is all an antiquated, vulgar 
prejudice. What you call poisons are really medicines. 
Medical virtue is not confined to the few specifics recognized 
by the Homeopathics, the Regular Faculty, or the Hydro- 
pathics, but is as extensive as the world. Everything on 
earth has a medical virtue; but how much, and of what 
sort, must be determined by experience. In fact, you must 
try for yourself whether any particular drug will kill you, 
or cure you. So here is the whole drug store to begin your 
cure with." A valuable gift, truly! "In the day we eat 
thereof, our eyes will be opened, and we shall be as gods, 



MCSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



273 



knowing good and evil." I think, reader, you and I will 
let somebody else try that experiment. 

"Why should men throw away their common sense, and 
swallow everything as inspired?" says another friend of the 
Rationalistic school. "God has given us reason to discern 
between good and evil, and commanded us to use it. Prove 
the spirits, whether they be of God. I spake as to wise men. 
Judge ye what I say, is the language of Scripture. The 
right of private judgment is the inalienable inheritance of 
Protestants. I am for examining the Bible according to the 
principles of reason and truth. 1 That only is to be regarded 
as true and valid which is matter of personal conviction.' 
The Old Testament is in many places contrary to my con- 
victions of truth and reason. I find that it consists of a 
great variety of treatises of various degrees of merit. Even 
in the same book it presents often strange contrasts — sub- 
lime moral precepts on one page; on the next, solemn re- 
quirements of frivolous ceremonies, utterly unworthy of 
God; or solemn narrations of miraculous interferences with 
the established course of nature, which, taken literally, are 
absolutely incredible. The judicious reader must therefore 
discriminate between those divine precepts of morality 
which were infused into the minds of the Hebrew sages, 
and those Jewish prejudices which their education and char- 
acter inclined them to regard as equally important; and he 
must divest the narrative of facts as they actually occurred, 
from the national legends and traditions which the compilers 
of the Pentateuch added to adorn the history." 

This, it will be seen, at once raises another and very im* 
portant question, namely: By what standard are the writ- 
ings of the Old Testament to be judged? Or rather it 
settles the question by taking it for granted, that every in- 
quirer is to judge them according to his own notions of 
reason and truth. But this does not help me out of my 
difficulty; for it supposes me already to possess the knowl- 
18 



274: 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



edge, and the virtue, which a revelation from God is needed 
to communicate. If I am able, by my own reason, to con- 
struct a perfect standard of morals to judge the Bible by, 
what need have I for the Bible revelation? And if I have 
the right to refuse obedience to any commands I may judge 
frivolous or unreasonable, before I know whether they came 
from God or not, and am bound to obey only those which 
agree with my notions of right, what authority has the law 
of God? A revelation from God which should submit its 
truths to be judged by the ignorance, and its commands by 
the inclinations, of sinful men, would by that very submis- 
sion declare its worthlessness. The use of a divine revela- 
tion is either to tell us some truth of which we are ismo- 
rant, or to enjoin some duty to which we are disinclined. 

Besides, it is not possible to make any such dissection of 
the moral precepts of the Bible, from the miraculous his- 
tory which forms their skeleton, as will leave them either 
truth or authority. It is the miraculous history that gives 
sanction to the divine morality, and without it the ten com- 
mandments would have no more hold on any man's con- 
science than the wise saws which Poor Richard says. Take, 
for instance, one of the first and most important of the 
Bible moralities — the sac-redness of marriage — which is 
wholly based upon a narrative of events utterly unparalleled; 
and, if judged by the usual course of nature, perfectly in- 
credible. The original difference in the formation of man 
and woman, and God's making at first one man and one 
woman, and joining them together with his blessing, consti- 
tute the reasons, and consecrate the pledge of marriage. 
'■'For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother — 
although the claims of the parental relation are very strong 
— and cleave to his wife — with whom it may be he has but 
a few weeks' acquaintance — and they tico shall be one flesh. 
What therefore God hath joined together let no man put 
asunder." But if the cause had no existence ; save in the 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 275 

brain of some antediluvian novel-writer, and Grod did not so 
unite them, the consequence is only a notion also, and any 
man may leave his wife whenever he likes. 

By far the most incredible narrative in the Bible is con- 
tained in the first verse : 11 In the beginning God created the 
heavens and the earth." All the other miracles recorded in 
it sink into familiarity compared with this stupendous dis- 
play of the supernatural. To the believer of this first great 
miracle none of its subsequent narratives can seem incredi- 
ble. But it is precisely upon this unexampled and incredi- 
ble narrative that the whole structure of Bible morality is 
built. If this extraordinary narrative be rejected as false, 
all the moral precepts of the Bible are not worth a feather. 
The morality of the Bible, then, stands or falls with its his- 
tory of God's supernatural works among men. 

It has been argued, that no amount of testimony can au- 
thenticate accounts of miracles; since a miracle, being a 
violation of the laws of nature, is contradicted by an unal- 
terable experience, but only suuoorted by fallible human 
testimony. 

But every step of this sophism is in error. A miracle 
can not be proven to be any more a violation of the laws of 
nature, than the existence of the nature regulated by laws. 
It may be more unusual, but not more supernatural. The 
restoration of life to a dead man is no greater violation of 
the laws of nature than the first bestowal of life on dead 
matter. Were the resurrections as common as childbirths 
nobody would consider them violations of the laws of nature. 

Moreover, our knowledge of the laws of nature is not 
based upon my experience, or yours, but upon the testimony 
of our teachers; which, so far from being uniform and in- 
variable as to the supremacy of the commonplace in nature, 
is perfectly conclusive as to the repeated occurrence of the 
miraculous. The miracles of Scripture are better authen- 
ticated than the facts of science. 



276 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



Scientific men talk a great deal of nonsense about the 
laws of nature, as if they were the only agents known in 
this world. But every man knows that he himself possesses 
the power to control the laws of nature, by bringing a higher 
law to arrest a lower ; as when the power of vegetation ar- 
rests the law of gravitation, and sends the drop of rain 
which had trickled down the outside of the bark of the pine, 
climbing up again a hundred feet ; or as when the power of 
animal life converts a hundred weight of grass into a leg of 
mutton ; or as when the power of the human intellect trans- 
forms a pound of zinc into telegrams, or a ton of niter and 
sulphur into death and destruction. Now if man can thus 
control and use the laws of nature for human purposes, 
why can not the God who made him so can-ning do as much? 
Aye, and as much more as God is greater than man? 

But we are told that no testimony can prove that any 
wonderful work has been wrought by God. " No testimony 
can reach to the supernatural ; testimony can apply only to 
apparent sensible facts ; testimony can only prove an extra- 
ordinary, and perhaps inexplicable, phenomenon or occur- 
rence; that it is due to supernatural causes is entirely 
dependent on the previous belief or assumption of the 
parties."* 

But when Christ said, " If I cast out devils by the Spirit 
of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you; " or 
when he said, at the grave of Lazarus, to Martha, " Said I 
not unto thee that if thou wouldest believe thou shouldest . 
see the glory of God?" can we not believe our Lord's, 
testimony, that he cast out devils, and raised the dead, by i 
the direct intervention of God? He appeals to his miracles \ 
as evidences of his divine authority : " The works that I do 
in my Father's name, they bear witness of me." "If I do 
not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do 3 



* Essays and Keviews, page 121. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



277 



though ye believe not me, believe the works ; that ye may 
know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in 
him."* Now I demand to know whether this testimony of 
our Lord is not to be believed ? And whether he does not 
directly claim to work miracles by the immediate power of 
God ? The testimony of the man whom G-od authenticates, 
by enabling him to do such miracles as those of Moses and 
of Christ, is conclusive as to the power by which they are 
wrought. So you read in Exodus iii. that Grod commis- 
sioned Moses to work miracles as signs of his divine com- 
mission, and seals of his testimony recorded in the Bible. 

If we proceed now to examine the facts of this history, 
it is evident, that neither your reason or mine, nor our per- 
sonal convictions, can be any rule of what is true and valid. 
The most that reason can say about history is, that the story 
seems probable; but so does any well-written novel; or that 
it is improbable ; but truth is often stranger than fiction ; 
and every genuine history relates wonderful events. Neither 
does our personal knowledge enable us to tell what was the 
original historical fact, how much was added by the Hebrew 
prejudices of Moses, and which are the legends with which 
it was afterward adorned; for neither you nor I were there 
to see. Nor can any two of those critics, who have under- 
taken to divide the facts from the fables according to their 
personal convictions of what is true and valid, agree upon 
any common principle of gleaning, or in gathering in their 
results. And if they could, the crop would not be worth 
barn-room; for the only conclusion in which they seem at 
all likely to agree is, that the story of creation in the be- 
ginning of the Book is a myth, like one of Ovid's Meta- 
morphoses; and that the prophecy of the resurrection, at 
the end, is another; and that there are a great many legends 
in the middle. Now, if so, why winnow such chaff? 



* John, chap. x. 25, 38. 



278 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



But while the Jewish" people exist as a distinct race, it is 
impossible rationally to deny some extraordinary origin of 
their extraordinary character and customs; and the Bible 
is the only history which pretends to tell it. The utter 
failure of Rationalistic criticism to give any rational account 
of the facts which must be admitted to account for the 
existence of the Jews as a distinct people, is ludicrously 
apparent in the attempts generally made to explain the 
miraculous narratives of the Bible. The tree of good and 
evil was a poisonous plant, like the poison oak, or the ma- 
chineal tree, under which our first parents fell asleep, and 
dreamed about the temptation, and the fall. The shining 
face of Moses was the natural effect of electricity. Zecha- 
riah's vision was the smoke of the lamps of the golden can- 
dlestick in the temple. The wise men of the East were 
some peddlers who presented toys to the child Jesus; and 
the star which went before, their servant carrying a torch. 
The angels who ministered to Christ in his temptation were 
a caravan bearing provisions. The transfiguration was an 
electric storm. The plagues of Egypt, the passage of the 
Bed Sea, and the miracles of the desert, were merely natu- 
ral phenomena, dextrously used by Moses and Aaron to suit 
their purpose. 

It is alleged that these enthusiastic patriots, full of the 
superstitions of an early age, which attributed all prodigies 
to God, and placed all heroes under his guidance, succeeded 
by their fiery eloquence in inspiring their captive country- 
men with the love of liberty; and had political dexterity 
enough to create a faction in their favor in the Egypt cabi- 
net. Then taking advantage of a fortunate succession of 
calamities arising from natural causes — such as an extraor- 
dinary rising of the Nile, in consequence of which it was 
more deeply colored than usual with the red mud of Nubia, 
and overflowed the country to a greater extent than usual, 
leaving on its retreat numerous ponds, which, of course, 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



279 



bred swarms of frogs and gnats, and raised malaria, spread- 
ing various sicknesses over the land, both to man and beast; 
a devastating visit of locusts, the well-known scourge of 
Africa ; a remarkable thunder-storm, accompanied with hail, 
causing great havoc of growing crops, as such hail-storms 
always do ; followed by the chamsin, or dust-storm from the 
desert, darkening the air with clouds of dust and sand ; and 
by an extraordinary mortality, the natural result of these 
various causes — they persuaded the superstitious Egyptians 
that these calamities were tokens of the displeasure of the 
God of the Hebrews, and improved the opportunity to es- 
cape, while the resources of the Egyptians were exhausted, 
and their minds confounded by these various misfortunes. 
Leading them to that part of the Red Sea south of Suez, 
where a succession of shoals stretch across from the Egyp- 
tian to the Arabian side, they crossed safely at low water, 
while the Egyptian army perished by the rising of the tide ; 
and the Israelites betaking themselves to a wandering, pas- 
toral life in the wilderness of Arabia, lived, as the Bedouins 
do at this day, on the milk of their flocks and the manna 
which was spontaneously produced by the tamarisk trees of 
Sinai ; where they remained until they had framed a civil 
and religious code, and whence they prosecuted their con- 
quests in various directions for fifty years, until their inva- 
sion of Palestine. This is the sum of what, with various 
modifications, Rationalist writers and preachers present us, 
as the genuine historic basis of the Mosaic narrative. 

It really does seem to have been very fortunate for the 
Israelites that so many misfortunes should happen to fall 
upon their oppressors, all in one season, and just at the time 
that men of such cleverness as Moses and Aaron were among 
them ; and that the Egyptians should luckily have imbibed 
the superstition, that all nature was under the direction of 
a Supreme Moral Governor, who was able and willing to 
wield all the elements for the punishment of oppressors. 



280 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS, 



It was also very lucky for these poor, overworked, and 
oppressed slaves — the class which in all other ages and 
countries suffers most from hard times — that they should 
have escaped unhurt by these calamities ; for if they had 
suffered by them as well as the Egyptians, they could not 
have persuaded them that God favored Israel. 

Here one can not but wonder that these learned Egyp- 
tians, whose colleges of priests were planted on the banks 
of the Nile, and who had made the climate, soil, and pro- 
ductions of their native land their constant study, should 
have been so ignorant of these natural causes of the plagues 
— so easily discovered nowadays by anybody who makes a 
summer trip to Egypt — as to be terrified into emancipating 
their slaves by a stormy season. Just imagine to yourself a 
couple of abolitionist lecturers proceeding to Lexington and 
commanding the slaveholders of Kentucky to liberate their 
slaves immediately, on pain of the Ohio being muddy dur- 
ing high water, and the swamps of the river-bottom being 
full of frogs and musquitoes ! But this interpretation does 
not reach the climax of absurdity till our nationalist Punch, 
by way of signalizing his deliverance from Egyptian bond- 
age, makes Pharaoh and his army forget that the tide ebbs 
and flows in the Red Sea, raises the tide over a shoal faster 
than cavalry could gallop from it, gathers an annual crop of 
twenty millions of bushels of manna from the thorn-bushes 
of Sinai, and feeds three millions of men, women, and chil- 
dren for forty years upon purgative medicine ! ! ! 

"We must then give up the problem as insoluble; for if 
reason be insufficient to give authority to the Bible, and 
criticism fails to discover its truth, how are we to know 
that it possesses either?" 

Just as you would discover the truth of any other his- 
tory, or the authority of any other law. You do not say, 
" The tale of the successive swellings of the Catawba, the 
Yadkin, and the Dan — three times in a fortnight, in Feb- 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



281 



ruary, 1781. immediately after tlie American army had re- 
treated across these rivers, preventing Cornwallis and the 
British forces from crossing till the little handful of weary 
and famished patriots had escaped — savors of the marvelous 
and leans so much toward the superstition of a special prov- 
idence, that it must be rejected as not historical." You 
inquire if there be sufficient testimony to the fact. You do 
not say, " The Revised Statutes present internal evidence of 
being a collection of political tracts by various authors, 
written at different times, differing also in style, and of 
various degrees of merit, many of them contrary to my in- 
most personal convictions ; therefore I can not acknowledge 
them as true and valid." You simply ask if this be a true 
copy of the laws passed by the legislature and signed by 
the governor ? Our inquiry about the truth of the history, 
and the authority of the laws of the Bible, must be of the 
same kind — an inquiry after testimony. Is this Book gen- 
uine or a forgery? Is it a true history or a lying romance? 
Have we any testimony on the subject? 

But it is alleged that the Book contains in itself evidence 
of having been written in an unscientific age, and in an un- 
historical manner ; and, particularly, that its statements of 
the creation of the world, and of mankind, only six thou- 
sand years ago, are refuted by the discoveries of geology ; 
which show us, that the world is many millions of years 
old, and that man has been on this world at least one hun- 
dred thousand years. In support of this last assertion, 
geologists refer to the remains of the lake dwellings in 
Switzerland ; to skeletons of men found in caves, with bones 
of animals now extinct ; to flint tools and weapons found in 
gravel beds, said to be of remote antiquity; to bones found 
deep in the Mississippi bottom ; and to the monuments of 
Egypt. 

In replying to this objection, we have first to say that we 
have elsewhere, in this volume, shown that the Bible no- 



282 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



where alleges that Grod created the earth only six thonsand 
years ago, but in many places emphatically affirms the con- 
trary. 

In the second place, as to the antiquity of man, the Bi- 
ble nowhere says, that Adam was the first human being 
whom God created ; nor that he and his posterity were the 
only intelligent beings occupying this world before our ten- 
ancy of it ; nor that we are even now the exclusive occu- 
pants. On the contrary, it makes very distinct allusions to 
other races, capable of assuming serpentine, swinish, and 
human bodies, and of meddling disastrously in earthly af- 
fairs in former times ; though, as it does not profess to 
tearh us truths which do not concern us, it gives us no nar- 
ration of the creation or history of pre-Adamite animals 
or men. But there is no more ground of objection against 
the Bible for neglecting to give us a history of pre-Adamite 
men, if there were such men, than for neglecting to describe 
the pre-Adamite animals, or the coal measures, or the neb- 
ulae, or the climate, soil, population, and politics of Jupiter. 
The Bible has one great object — to teach men how to be 
holy and happy ; and it can not be shown that the chronicles 
of the pre-Adamites, if they kept chronicles of their al- 
leged savage state, would help us in the acquisition of holi- 
ness. 

No discoveries, then, which geologists may make of pre- 
Adamite races of men, can at all affect the credit of Moses' 
account of the creation of Adam, and of the history of his 
family. They may fill museums, if they please, with their 
flint arrow-heads and axes, they may pile up pyramids of 
stone mortars, they may perhaps some day discover an old- 
world bronze railroad, and bronze-clad or copper-bottomed 
steamboats, they may produce pre Adamic electric, aero- 
nautic engines, and magnetic sewing machines, or bone nee- 
dles, we care not which; and we will admire them, and confess 
that they are very curious, and perhaps very old ; but unless 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



283 



they can show that Adam was descended from these old- 
world folks, we have no biblical quarrel with them. Like 
Moses, we will let them rest in peace. 

But we would remark, thirdly, that no such discoveries 
have yet been made. No human bone, implement, or mon- 
ument, has yet been discovered which can be proved to be 
more ancient than Adam, or nearly so ancient. There is 
not a single indisputable fact to show, that any of the tools, 
bones, or monuments; alleged in this discussion, is of any 
specific date whatever, save that the Danish bogs came down 
to the date of the Danish invasion of Ireland in the eleventh 
century; the burnt corn of the Swiss lake dwellings was 
probably that which Julius Caesar describes the Helvetians 
as burning preparatory to their invasion of Gaul ; and the 
monuments of Egypt, for which Bunsen claimed twenty 
thousand years, are now acknowledged by the best Egyp- 
tologists to reach not quite to 3000 B. C. As to the 
bone found at the base of the bluff at Memphis, it was 
not found in situ, and probably was washed out of some 
Indian grave at the top, and buried in the debris. The 
Abbeville skull* had a fresh tooth in it, for which thirty- 
five thousand years was claimed, until examination by a com- 
petent committee exposed the deception. Where there is a 
good paying demand for pre-Adamite skulls, there will al- 
ways be a good supply. Dr. Dowler calculates the age of a 
skeleton of an Indian, found at the depth of sixteen feet in 
digging the gas works at New Orleans, at fifty thousand 
years ; while the U. S. Coast Surveying Department show 
that the whole Delta is not more than four thousand four 
hundred years old. 

These gross errors, which affront our common sense, 
wherever we are able to test geological calculations, fill us 

* Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1864, p. 254, Annual Cyclopae- 
dia, 1863, p. 377. 



284 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



with mistrust of their allegations of evidence, which, from 
the nature of the case, we can not test. 

Of this class is the discovery of human bones in caves 
containing the bones of cave hears, rhinocerii, mammoths, 
and other extinct animals. The argument is that man and 
these animals lived at the same time. Yery well, what time 
was that? There is no evidence to show that it was a hun- 
dred thousand years ago. The Siberian hunters fed their 
dogs on the flesh of a mammoth they found frozen in mud 
bluffs at the mouth of the Lena, and its hair and wool are 
now in the museum of St. Petersburg. Dr. Warren's 
mastadon giganttus had some bushels of pine and maple 
twigs, in excellent preservation, in its stomach, when ex- 
humed in Orange County, New York ; and you may see for 
yourself the vegetable fiber found in its teeth in his museum 
in Boston.* Does any one believe that the vegetable fiber 
and maple twigs have kept their shape one hundred thou- 
sand years? The mammoth found in the ditch of the Tez- 
cucoco road must have fallen in after the Incas had dug that 
ditch. The Indians have a tradition that their fathers 
hunted a huge deer with a hand on his face, which slept 
leaning against the trees. And there is good geological 
reason for believing that the final extinction of the mam- 
moth, the European rhinoceros, and their contemporaries, 
was caused by the change of climate in Northern Europe, 
Asia, and America, caused by the elevation of these northern 
lands, which has been going on since the tenth century, and 
which, about three centuries ago, closed the Polar Sea, ren- \ 
dering Greenland uninhabitable. The juxtaposition, then, 
of the bones of man and extinct animals is no proof of the 
remote antiquity of either. And no proof has been made 
from the nature or depth of the overlying deposits. 

The shape, size, and general character of the skulls al- 



* Mastodon Giganteus, Boston, 1855, p. 199. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



285 



leged to be of such remote antiquity give no countenance 
to the theory of man's brutal origin; which is the great 
thing to be gained by giving him a remote antiquity. The 
Enghis skull is in no way inferior to many good modern 
Indian skulls; and the man of Mentone stood six feet one 
in his stocking soles (if he wore stockings), having a good 
John Bull head between his shoulders, with a facial angle 
equal to that of Generals Grant or Von Moltke ; and in fact 
being a fine old Gallic gentleman, all of the good old times. 

Geologists, however, lay stress on the cumulative charac- 
ter of the evidence they produce ; owning that no single fact 
is conclusive, but claiming that credence should be given 
to the accumulation of facts. But no accumulation of 
ciphers will amount to anything. All the alleged facts are 
found to be fatally defective either in authenticity or defi- 
niteness. No multitude of doubts can assure us of the 
certainty of a fact or assertion. The evidence for the pre- 
Adamite antiquity of man is only a gathering of facts 
doubtful, and wholly indeterminate, without any element of 
proof of remote antiquity.* 

But there is a source of evidence of the most undeniable . 
character, to which we may appeal for a decision of the 
subject. The law of population is as certain as any other 
law of nature ; and it tends to the regular increase of man- 
kind. Population tends to double itself every twenty-five 
years, as we see in the United States. In less favored 
countries the rate is not so rapid. In Europe it doubles 
every fifty years ; and nowhere in less than two centuries. 
And the result is, that if the human race had existed on 

* For a fuller discussion df the subject, and references to the au- 
thorities, which our space here forbids, I must refer the curious 
reader to the Princeton Review, Vol. XL. No. 4, where I have no- 
ticed every fact bearing on the subject up to that date; merely 
adding that no new fact, establishing man's remote antiquity, has 
been established up to this date, September 21, 1874. 



286 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



this earth under existing laws of nature, as the evolutionists 
allege, for one hundred thousand years, not only must they 
have multiplied until their bones would have covered the 
earth, and filled the sea, but, as Sir John Herschel shows, 
they would have formed a vertical column, having for its 
base the whole surface of the earth, and for its height three 
thousand six hundred and seventy-four times the sun's dis- 
tance from the earth x 

The existing population of the globe corresponds pretty 
well to the natural increase of three pairs in forty centuries, 
which is something near to the Bible chronology. The laws 
of population, then, inexorably refuse the indefinite, or 
even the remote antiquity of mankind, and vindicate Moses 
as a writer of truthful history. 

The alleged anachronisms of the Pentateuch have been 
adduced as testimony that it could not have been written 
till long after the time of Moses. These alleged anachro- 
nisms are generally the insertion of a modern name of a city 
instead of the ancient name, or an explanatory addition 
which would not have been necessary in the days of Moses. 
Now if all these cases could be proved, they would at most 
only show that the scribes who copied the manuscripts in 
later ages had inserted these explanatory changes or addi- 
tions, under proper authority. Everybody's common sense 
will tell him, that Moses did not narrate his own death in 
the last chapter of Deuteronomy; but it is none the less 
true though Joshua, or some other prophet, added that 
postscript. 

But Hengstenberg hasf examined these alleged anachro- 
nisms in detail, and shown that the objectors allow themselves 
to interpolate into the text a meaning of their own in order 
to show the inaccuracy of the Bible. For instance, Genesis 

* Familiar Lectures, page 456. 

t Authenticity of the Pentateuch, II. 150 f 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



287 



xii. G, " The Canaanite was then in the land," they maintain 
could only be written after the Canaanites had been driven 
out. They interpolate still, which is not in the text. But 
they entirely mistake the meaning of the passage, which 
refers to an earlier statement of the same fact, chapter x. 
15, to show that Abraham, the heir of the promise, came as 
a stranger and a pilgrim to a land preoccupied by a power- 
ful people, who are again mentioned, chapter xiii. 7, for the 
purpose of showing how Lot and Abraham came to be so 
crowded as to separate. 

Another of the prominent instances is the name of the 
ancient city of Hebron, which, in the book of Joshua, is 
said to have been anciently called Kirjath-arba. But Num- 
bers xiii. 22, which states that Hebron was built seven years 
before Zoan in Egypt, and was the residence of Ahiman, 
Sheshai, and Talmai, the sons of Anak, shows that the writer 
was well acquainted with the history of the place, and Gen- 
esis xxxv. 27 shows that Hebron was the first name, and 
that it had two other names added to it, both after the time 
of Abraham, since Mamre was his contemporary, and the 
Anakiin lived centuries later. This may stand for a speci- 
men of the alleged anachronisms of the Pentateuch. 

But now comes Bishop Colenso with his slate and pencil 
to demonstrate to us that, no matter who wrote it, or by 
what external authority it is commended, the Pentateuch is 
so full of arithmetical errors, and of impossible narratives, 
in its accounts of common affairs, as well as in its miracu- 
lous stories, that not only is it not the Word of Gocl, but 
that it is not even a truthful history, and stands self-con- 
victed of being a collection of fables. Of course, if that 
can be proved, there is an end of the matter, though it 
would still seem strange that it should have been left for 
the bishop to discover Moses' ignorance of arithmetic, and 
of camp-life among the Arabs. Nevertheless the very nov- 
elty of a bishop assaulting the Bible in such a style has 



288 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



secured for him a large number of readers, many of thein 
ignorant enough to believe his assertions, though too indo- 
lent to test his calculations, or even to read the passages he 
criticises. This renders some notice of his criticisms neces- 
sary according to our plan of considering objections accord- 
ing to their popularity, rather than according to their merit. 
For, on examining the bishop's objections to the Bible, they 
are all found to arise from want of science, want of sense, 
or ignorance of Scripture — an inability to read the Scrip- 
tures in their original Hebrew, or even to cite them correctly 
in English. In some criticisms he contrives to compile 
.these three kind of blunders into a single chapter, making 
a mosaic of very amusing reading indeed. 

Of course we can only give specimens of his peculiar 
style of attack on the Bible ; for to expose all his blunders 
would require some volumes as large as his own. But we 
shall select illustrative instances of the bishop's blunders 
from each of the departments indicated above. 

As a specimen of the bishop's blunders in science, let us 
take the first which he offers — his attempt to convict Moses 
of a contradiction to geology in his account of the deluge. 

Bishop Colenso declares that the Bible teaches that the 
deluge was universal, and that this is contradicted, among 
other things, by certain geological discoveries, in Auvergne, 
of volcanic cones of light cinders, which would have been 
swept away by any such flood. 

Aye, if they had only been there at that time ! But Eli 
de Beaumont, a learned geologist, not convicted of so many 
blunders as the bishop, alleges that the whole of the system 
of Teanarus, including the elevation of Stromboli, and 
iEtna, has been formed since the catastrophe of the princi- 
pal Alps; and that the volcanoes of Auvergne and the 
Vivarrusare of post-Aclamic origin.* So the bishop's geology 



* Creation's Testimony to its God. London, 1867, page 338. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



289 



does not contradict what he thinks the Bible says after all. 
On the contrary, so far from geology contradicting a univer- 
sal deluge, the best geologists speak of every part of the 
earth having been repeatedly under the sea, and they collect 
its fossils on the tops of the mountains. 

But the bishop ought to know that hundreds of years 
ago, before geology was born, some of the most learned 
bishops and theologians of his own Church, as well as some 
of the chief scholars of the dissenters, following the most 
learned of the Hebrew rabbis, did not believe that the Bible 
taught that the deluge was universal. For instance, Bishop 
Stillingfleet, in his great work, Origines Sacra, says: "I can 
not see any urgent neceessity from the Scriptures to assert 
that the flood did spread over all the surface of the earth. 
That all mankind, those in the ark excepted, were destroyed 
by it, is most certain, according to the Scriptures. The 
flood was universal as to mankind, but from thence follows 
no necessity at all of asserting the universality of it as to the 
globe of the earth, unless it be sufficiently proved that the 
whole earth was peopled before the flood ; which I despair 
of ever seeing proved." Matthew Poole says: "Where was 
the need of overwhelming those regions of the earth in 
which there were no human beings? It would be highly 
unreasonable to suppose that mankind had so increased be- 
fore the deluge as to have penetrated to all the corners of 
the earth. It is indeed not probable that they had ex- 
tended themselves beyond the limits of Syria and Mesopo- 
tamia. Absurd it would be to affirm that the effects of the 
punishment, inflicted upon men alone, applied to those places 
in which there were no men. If, then, we should entertain 
the belief that not so much as the hundredth part of the 
globe was overspread with water, still the deluge would 
be universal; because the extirpation took effect upon all 
the part of the globe' then inhabited." 

Nor does the language of the Bible necessarily convey 
19 



290 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



the idea that the whole surface of the globe was covered 
with water. Dathe, professor of Hebrew (in his Opuscala ad 
Grisin, edited by Boseninuller, 1795), says: "Interpreters 
do not agree whether the deluge inundated the whole earth 
or only the. regions then inhabited. I adopt the latter 
opinion. The phrase all does not prove the inundation to 
have been universal. It appears that in many places hoi is 
to be understood as limited to the thing or place spoken of. 
Hence all the animals introduced into the ark were only 
those of the region inundated." 

But the most literal rendering of the language B of Moses 
does not necessitate our belief that when he says that the 
waters covered the whole earth, arets, he meant the whole 
globe. The common Bible meaning of this word is land, 
country, or region, as the perpetually recurring phrases, 
the land, arets, of Havilah, the land of Nod, the land of 
Ethiopia, the land of Goshen, the land of Egypt, the land 
of Canaan, which occurs three hundred and ninety times, 
may convince every reader beyond the possibility of mis- 
take. How now, from this word being used by Moses, 
could this learned bishop conclude that he necessarily meant 
to describe the globe? Moses says, u The waters prevailed 
upon and covered the whole country." The bishop trans- 
lates, "covered the whole globe;" evidently in order to 
make Moses commit a blunder. 

But reference is made to the expression, "All the high 
hills under the whole heavens were covered;" which the 
bishop will have it meant all the mountains under the moon. 

But the popular use of the word "heavens," in Moses' 
day, had as little reference to universal space, as the word 
earth, or land, had to the whole globe. It meant simply 
the visible heavens over any place : and its extent was de- 
fined by the extent of the earth those visible heavens cov- 
ered. Thus Moses himself defines it, Deuteronomy iv. 32 : 
"Ask from the one side of heaven unto the other." Deu- 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



291 



teronomy xxviii. 8: "Thy heaven over thee shall be as 
brass." Deuteronomy ii. 25: "This day I will begin to 
put the fear of thee upon the nations that are under the 
whole heaven." And so commonly throughout the Bible, 
"the clouds of heaven," "the fowls of heaven," refer to the 
optical heavens. Such is the meaning in Genesis. Noah 
describes the deluge as it appeared to h:m, as covering all 
the hills within the horizon of observation, and Moses 
copies Noah's log-book. 

The geologist adds his testimony to the existing evidences 
of the recent submergence of a large region of Persia and 
Turkey around the Caspian Sea, and its subsequent eleva- 
tion. But it is no part of our business to show in what 
way God produced the deluge. Geology shows us, how- 
ever, that the submergence of parts of the earth beneath 
the sea, and their subsequent elevation, is the most common 
of all geological phenomena ; almost all existing continents 
and islands having been submerged. 

The bishop is as far behind the age in his astronomy as 
in his geology, lie blindly follows the Infidels of the last 
century in their attack on Joshua's miracle, arresting the 
sun and moon, as inconsistent with their science; which 
taught the immobility of the sun and moon, it seems, and 
was entirely ignorant of the modern discovery of the grand 
motions of the fixed stars, including our sun, and of the 
dependence of all the planets, including our earth and moon, 
upon that grand motion for the motive power of their revolu- 
tions.* 

One wonders from what college the bishop came out igno- 
rant of facts known to the boys of American common 
schools. 

A great many of the bishop's blunders are occasioned by 
want of sense. The process is very simple. The sacred 

, *See this subject more fully discussed in chapter XII., Telescopic 
Yiews of Scripture. 



292 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



history is very brief. Only the headings of things are re- 
corded. Much must be supplied by the common sense of 
the reader. The manners of the East are very different 
from ours. Three thousand years have greatly changed the 
face of the country Ignore all this, and interpret the 
Pentateuch as though it consisted of the letters of Our Own 
Correspondent, and you will find difficulties on every page. 
Such is the style of Colenso's criticism. Assume that Moses 
gives a full and complete chronicle of all events which have 
happened since the creation, and then dispute the recorded 
facts because it can easily be shown he omitted many. 

But the bishop has not the honor of discovering this 
method, or of founding this school of criticism. We have 
heard village critics of the loom and the forge discuss such 
questions as are handled by Colenso, and the Essays and 
Reviews, and often with much more acuteness and penetra- 
tion. With what eclat has our village critic unhorsed the 
itinerant preacher with the inquiry, What became of the 
forks belonging to the nine and twenty knives which Ezra 
brought back from Babylon ? but was, alas ! himself routed 
in the moment of triumph by the inquiry as to the sex of 
the odd clean beasts of Noah's sevens. How often has 1 our 
village blacksmith critic requested a sermon upon the gene- 
alogy of Melchizedek, which the minister agreed to furnish 
when our blacksmith could tell him the foundry which 
manufactured Tubal Cain's hammer and anvil. Lot's wife, 
the witch of Endor, Jonah's whale, the sundial of Ahaz, 
and the population of Nineveh, were all duly discussed, to- 
gether with the bodies in which the angels dined with Abra- 
ham. Did the loaves and fishes miraculously multiply in 
numbers, or increase in size? Where did the angel get the 
flour to bake the cake for Elijah? Did our Lord catch the 
fish by net, or by miracle, which he used in the Lord's Din- 
ner on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. But the question — 
which we marvel beyond measure that the bishop overlooks 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



293 



— always was, Where did Cain get his wife? This is the 
fundamental question for such critics. The difficulty, it 
will be perceived, lies across the very threshold of the his- 
tory. How did he stumble over i£ without record of his 
misadventure? It recurs, however, on every page. If the 
bishop will only answer that question, and introduce us po- 
litely to Cain's wife, I will engage that she will answer most 
of these other difficult questions. 1 Had Seth a wife? How 
could Noah and his three sons build a ship larger than the 
Great Eastern? We can imagine the roars of laughter 
with which the bigger school-boys will greet the serious ex- 
hibition of their old tests of dullness, in a printed book, 
and by a learned bishop, as objections to the inspiration of 
the Bible But the bishop does actually devote Chapter V. 
to the impossibility of Moses addressing all Israel ; Chapter 
VI. to the extent of the camp compared with the priest's 
duties; Chapter XX. to the grave difficulty of the three 
priestly families consuming the offerings of some millions of 
people ; which surely to a bishop of the Church of England 
should not be an unparalleled feat. Such chapters enable 
us to appreciate the mental caliber of our critic, and excuse 
us from argument with a man incapable of interpreting 
popular phrases. He would prove the associated press dis- 
patches all a myth, because it is impossible for the House 
of Commons to appear at the bar of the House of Lords — ■ 
six hundred men to stand on four square yards of floor ; 
for McClellan to address the Army of the Potomac, which 
extended along a line of thirty miles ; for Grant and Sher- 
man — two men — to capture Vicksburg and thirty thousand 
prisoners! Manifestly impossible. 

The most specious of all the sophistry spread over the vol- 
ume is that contained in the Seventeenth Chapter, regard- 
ing the increase of Jacob's family, of seventy persons, to a 
nation of two or three millions, in Egypt, during the two 
hundred and fifteen years to which he confines the bondage. 



294 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



But it is only another case of Cain's wife. The Pentateuch 
gives us the list of Jacob's children and their wives, but 
makes no formal mention in that place of their servants and 
retainers. These, in Abraham's times, amounted to three 
hundred fencible men, or a population of fifteen hundred ; 
who would have increased in Jacob's time to several thou- 
sands, capable of defending the border land of Goshen 
against the marauding Bedouin. And this population could 
easily increase to the three millions of the Exodus, at the 
same ratio in which the population of the United States is 
now increasing; so that it is a mere superfluity of naughti- 
ness for the bishop to deny what the sacred historian so 
emphatically asserts : "That the people were fruitful, and 
increased abundantly, and multiplied, and the land was 
filled with them." But the bishop utterly ignores the peo- 
ple of the clan, and taking his slate and pencil ciphers out 
the impossibility of Jacob's family amounting to so many. 
And yet it is not impossible that in the four hundred and 
thirty years which the sacred historian so precisely asserts 
as the period of their sojourn in Egypt, Exodus xii. 40, 
the family alone might have multiplied as fast as the family 
of the famous Jonathan Edwards, which, in a hundred years 
after his death, numbered two thousand souls. 

Peter Cartwright, the venerable Methodist minister, cele- 
brated his eighty-seventh birthday on the first of September, 
1871, at Pleasant Plains, Sangamon County, Illinois, sur- 
rounded by one hundred and twenty children, grandchildren 
and great-grandchildren. Now, if this family of two per- 
sons could so increase in eighty-seven years, why could not 
Jacob's family, of seventy persons, increase in equal ratio ? 
In that case, even in the two hundred and fifteen years to 
which the bishop limits the sojourn in Egypt, the Israelites 
would have amounted to over eight millions. If it be ob- 
jected that this was a case of special blessing, we answer 
that the Israelites are expressly asserted to have been spe- 



MOSES AND TIIE PROPHETS. 



295 



cially and wonderfully multiplied. There is, therefore, no 
improbability in Moses' numbers. 

The bishop ascribes to Moses another of his own blunders ; 
this time, however, in reading his Bible in plain English, 
which correctly translates the Hebrew — Exodus xiii. 2. The 
Lord commands Moses and Israel to " Sanctify to him every 
male that openeth the womb, both of man and beast," from 
the time of the death of the first-born of the Egyptians. 
The impropriety of ex post facto legislation, the reason as- 
signed for this law, and the grammatical meaning of the 
language in the present tense, all combine to show that the 
law is prospective ; and the number of the first-born, twen- 
ty-two thousand two hundred and seventy-five, afterward 
given in Numbers, shows plainly that this is the meaning, 
being about the proper increase of thirteen months. But 
the bishop strangely blunders into the notion that this is 
the number of all the first-born of Israel; only about one 
in forty-five or fifty, and therefore argues against the his- 
torical veracity of the Pentateuch. A good many of the 
bishop's blunders arise in this way from misreading his 
Bible. 

He makes another blunder of this kind, and as usual 
charges' it on Moses, in his misreading of Leviticus xxiii. 40, 
as if directing Israel to make booths of palm branches and 
willows at the feast of tabernacles, instead of bearing the 
palms of victory in triumph into the temple of Grod. The 
son of the chief rabbi of London ridicules the bishop's 
Hebrew scholarship here, saying that any Jewish child 
could have set him right; but had he read even his English 
translation carefully he need not have blundered here. 

In connection with the subject of the numbers of the 
people we notice his tacit assumption — that Moses records 
everything necessary for a statistical table — in his criticisms 
on the numbers of the Danites and Levites, Chapters XVIII. 
and XVI.; and on Judah's family, Chapter II. He 



296 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



takes it for granted that because the Exodus took place in 
the lifetime of the fourth generation of some of the sons 
of Jacob, therefore there were none but four generations 
born in the two hundred and fifteen years to which he con- 
fines the bondage, and none but those whose names are re- 
corded. This is a blunder of the same sort as if he should 
mistake the list of the British peerage for a census of all 
the families of Great Britain, and calculate the average du- 
ration of human life by the ages of the Duke of Wellington 
and Lord Palmerston. But here we have a wonderful in- 
stance of the providence which often makes objectors re- 
fute themselves. The chapter on Judah's family (II.) shows 
that in forty-two years J udah had grandchildren ten or twelve 
years old ; as many Syrians, Persians, and Hindoos have at 
this day. But if six generations could thus be born in 
Syria, or India, in a century, why not in Egypt? And 1 
Chronicles vii. 20, 21 enumerates ten generations of the 
sons of Ephraim ; giving ample opportunity for the biblical 
increase. 

Another set of the bishop's blunders is occasioned by his 
utter ignorance of camp-life, especially among the Arabs. 
In Chapter VIII. he assumes that all the people had tents, 
and the bishop orders them made of leather. But he con- 
cludes they could not possibly get them, nor if they had 
them could they carry them. By and by he provides them 
with two millions of cattle, however; and it is likely each 
of them had a skin, and was able to carry it for a while, 
while the Hebrews dwelt in the booths of the encampments 
they still commemorate in the feast of tabernacles. But 
the word "tents" is the common phrase for any kind of 
shelter in Scripture, including even houses in the expres- 
sion, "To your tents, Israel," used in the days of David. 

In Chapter IX. he discusses the probability of their ob- 
taining arms in Egypt. A week with one of the Union 
armies would show him how speedily freedmen can provide 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



297 



themselves with arms and learn tactics; and a short resi- 
dence in Ireland would teach him the utter impossibility of 
preventing a discontented people from arming themselves 
even with firearms ; much more when every grove furnished 
artillery. He protests that all Egypt could not furnish 
lambs enough for the passover ; because in Natal an acre 
will only graze one sheep, forgetting that Moses was not 
raising sheep in Natal, but in the best of the land of Goshen, 
which, if as fertile as the county of Dorset in England, 
would easily keep five millions of sheep. 

In Chapter X. he insists on the impossibility of giving 
warning of the passover, and subsequent march, in one day, 
to a population as large as London, scattered over two or 
three counties. Has he forgotten the straws carried over 
all Ireland in one night, and the Chupatties of the Indian 
Mutiny ? The negro insurrection of Charleston was known 
by the negroes of Louisiana two days before their masters 
received the intelligence by mail. Critics know little of the 
power of the love of freedom. But there is no reason for 
the bishop's supposition that all the preparations for leaving 
were made in one day, save his own mistake of the Hebrew 
of Exodus xii. 12, as referring to the night of the day on 
which God spake to Moses, instead of the night of the day 
of which he was speaking, as the slightest reflection on the 
context shows. 

In Chapter XL the bishop assumes the functions of Major- 
General, and masses his army — rank, and file, wagon train, 
hospital, commissariat, contrabands, droves of cattle, and 
camp followers — into a mass of fifty front and twenty-two miles 
long Very naturally he gets into a tremendous jam, out of 
which we have no intention of extricating him ; merely re- 
marking that bishops do not make good generals, and that 
Arab Sheikhs do not march in that way. They scatter 
themselves and their cattle over the whole country for forty 
or fifty miles, and have no confusion; and attend moreover 



298 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



to Closes' sanitary camp regulations, in their several en- 
campments. 

In Chapter XII. he exerts himself to starve the cattle 
for want of pasture and water; garbling Moses' account of 
the wilderness for that purpose, Deuteronomy viii. 15, 
"Beware that thou forget not Jehovah, thy God, who led 
thee through the great and terrible wilderness, wherein were 
fiery serpents, and scorpions, where there was no water" 
Here he stops, as if this was all that referred to the subject. 
But when we turn to the passage, we find that he omits the 
most material part of the speech. For Moses goes on to 
say, in the hearing of all Israel, who could certainly have 
contradicted him had the fact not been well known to them, 
''Who brought thee forth water out of the rock of flint." 
Moses' account is quite self-consistent, and the bishop's 
garbling of it is dishonest. There were districts of Arabia 
so dry and sterile that but for this miraculous supply both 
men and beasts had perished ; but the greater part of the 
country was simply uninhabited pasture land, sufficiently 
productive even now to support several Arab tribes; and 
much better wooded and watered then. The monuments 
of Egypt abundantly testify the number and power of its 
shepherd kings, who pastured their flocks upon it in their 
successive invasions of Egypt. 

The bishop says, Chapter XIII., that "the climax of in- 
consistencies between facts and figures is reached when we 
come to the notice by the Lord to Israel, contained in 
Exodus xxiii. 29, " I will not drive them, the Canaanites, 
out from before thee in one year, lest the land become des- 
olate, and the beasts of the field multiply against thee." 
The argument is that a population of two millions was as- 
signed to a territory of only eleven thousand square miles; 
and consequently would be more dense than the population 
of the agricultural region of England, where there is no 
danger of wild beasts multiplying. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



299 



But the objection is again based on a blunder, and a garb- 
ling of the text of Scripture Had the bishop done him- 
self and his readers the justice to complete the passage 
■which he has half cited, by inserting the next two verses, 
he could have read verse thirty-one : "And I will set thy 
bounds from the Red Sea even to the Sea of the Philistines, 
and from the desert unto the river," i. e., the Euphrates, as 
other passages show, Genesis xv. 18. That is to say, a ter- 
ritory five hundred miles long by one hundred miles broad, 
or fifty thousand square miles, was to be occupied by two 
millions of people. That is about the present population, 
and all travelers testify that three-fourths of it lies desolate. 
Prof. Porter saw seventy deserted towns and villages in 
Bashan alone. But for the rifle and gunpowder the wild 
beasts would now overpower the inhabitants. 

By a wonderful providence, contemporaneously with these 
attacks, the Lord has raised up an army of scholars, travel- 
ers, and archaeologists, whose explorations illustrate the 
Bible in a remarkable manner, throwing new light upon its 
history, poetry, and prophecy. It is refreshing to turn 
from the cavils of ignorant criticism to the clear light of 
discovered facts and imperishable monuments. 

The Bible history has recently received a wonderful 
amount of illustration and confirmation from the researches 
of scholars and discoverers amid the ruins of Egypt, Persia, 
and Assyria; completely exploding the theory that this 
history was a comparatively recent composition, written 
long after the events which it records, and betraying its 
want of genuineness by the anachronisms and errors of de- 
scription of historical and natural events with which it 
abounds. Wherever it differed from the statements of any 
Greek, or other heathen historian, it was forthwith alleged 
that Moses was wrong, and the profane author was right; 
and for a long time nobody could bring any evidence on the 
other side, because there were no contemporary records j 



300 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



the oldest heathen historian being a thousand years later 
than Moses. But by some strange inspiration, the Lord 
set a multitude of explorers to work upon the monuments 
of Egypt, deciphering the hieroglyphics which had so long 
puzzled the world, digging into the mounds which had for 
centuries covered the ruined palaces and cities of Persia 
and Assyria, and bringing to Europe ship -loads of recovered 
statues, marbles, cyliuders, mummies, obelisks, papyrii, cov- 
ered with all manner of pictures and inscriptions, civil, re- 
ligious, and political, contemporary with the Bible history, 
and setting the best scholars of Europe to decipher and 
translate them. They are only, as yet, in the middle of 
their labors, but already so much has been discovered as to 
warrant the assertion that before they have finished they 
will furnish full corroboration of all the great outlines of 
Old Testament history. 

Egypt was the first to come forward in furnishing her 
quota of commentary to the corroboration of the Books of 
Moses. Hengstenberg's Egypt and the Boohs of Moses, 
Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, and Osburn's Monumental 
History of Egypt, furnish almost a commentary upon Moses' 
account of Egyptian affairs, confirming every biblical allu- 
sion to Egypt as historically correct, and revealing to us 
even the natural causes of the seven years high Nile and 
plenteous harvests; in the overflow of the great central 
lake in Nubia wearing away the embankment ; and of the 
seven years subsequent low Nile and famine, by the drought 
consequent on this immense drainage. The very titles ofj 
Joseph as, "Director of the Full and Empty Irrigating: 
Canals," "Steward of the Granaries," etc.. etc., are still tot- 
be read on his tomb at Sakkarah,* and much more of the 
same sort. 

F. Newman ridicules the Bible narrative of Shishak's 
* Osburn's Monumental History. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



301 



expedition against Rehoboam as a mere fictitious embellish- 
ment of an otherwise tame narrative ;* but Egyptologists, 
like Stuart, Poole, and Brugsch, have examined the inscrip- 
tion of Shishak, at Karnak, and allege that it fully corrob- 
arates the Scripture history, f 

Some of the most obscure portions of the Bible, which 
have long been stumbling-blocks to commentators and his- 
torians, are now thus illuminated by the light of modern 
discoveries of monuments and inscriptions found in the 
ruins of the ancient cities of Persia and Assyria, upon 
which they in turn cast such light as to enable the discov- 
eries of Layard and Rawlinson to assume an intelligible 
coherency. The tenth and eleventh chapters of Genesis, 
written a thousand years before Herodotus or Manetho, and 
which Rationalistic commentators were so long " unable to 
verify by their own consciousness," and which were there- 
fore consigned to the realm of mythology, are now acknowl- 
edged by the first scholars and discoverers to stand at the 
head of the page of reliable history, and to form the basis 
of all scientific ethnography. 

The diversity of languages among mankind seems not to 
have attracted the attention of the Greek philosophers. 
When modern inquirers began to investigate the matter, 
they were well-nigh confounded by the multitude of dia- 
lects and languages. The labor of three generations of 
scholars has been expended upon philology, the most ancient 
monument of mankind. And the result is that all the 
various languages of earth have at length been classified 
under three tongues — the Shemitic, the Aryan, and the 
Turanian. But this most recent discovery of comparative 
philology was narrated by Moses thirty centuries ago, with 
the historical account of the origin of the division of the 

* Hebrew Monarchy, 160. 

t Prof. Kawlinson's Modern Skepticism, 285. 



302 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



primeval family into three separate colonies, colonizing the 
earth after their families and after their tongues. — Genesis 
x. 32. The discovery of this coincidence fills Bunsen with 
astonishment. " Comparative philology," he says, " would 
have been compelled to set forth as a postulate the supposi- 
tion of some such division of languages in Asia, especially 
on the ground of the relation of the Egyptian language to 
the Shemitic, even if the Bible had not assured us of the 
truth of this great historical event. It is truly wonderful ; 
it is a matter of astonishment; it is more than a mere as- 
tounding fact that something so purely historical, and yet 
divinely fixed — something so conformable to reason, and 
yet not to be conceived of as a mere natural development- — 
is here related to us out of. the oldest primeval period, and 
which now for the first time, through the new science of 
philology, has become capable of being historically and 
philosophically explained." 

The brief, yet definite, assertions of the Hamitic origin 
of the old empire of Babylon, and of an Asiatic Cush or 
Ethiopia, which have been so repeatedly charged against the 
Bible as blunders, even by some profound scholars, have 
been vindicated by the recent discoveries in the mounds of 
Chaldea Proper of multitudes of ine-criptions in a language 
which Sir H. Bawlinson affirms "is decidedly Cushite or 
Ethiopian," and the modern languages to which it makes 
the nearest approaches are those of Southern Arabia and 
Abyssinia. The old traditions have then been confirmed 
by comparative philology, and both are side lights to Scrip- 
ture. *<■*.*« The primitive race which bore sway in 
Chaldea Proper is demonstrated to have belonged to this 
Ethnic type."* 

" The conquest of Palestine is recorded on the annals of 
Sennacherib, and the cylinder of Tiglath-Pileser describes 



* Ancient Monarchies I. 65. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



303 



his invasion of Palestine. The names of Jehu, of Ama- 
ziah, of Hezekiah, of Omri, Ahaz, and Uzziah have been 
made out. The very clay which sealed the treaty between 
the kings of Judah and Assyria, with the impresses of their 
joint seals upon it, is preserved in the Nineveh gallery. The 
library of Assurbanipal, in twenty thousand fragments, 
contains among other scientific treatises, such as astronomi- 
cal notices, grammatical essays, tables of verbs, genealogies, 
etc., an historico-geographical account of Babylonia and the 
surrounding countries. As far as these fragments have 
been translated, the district and tribal names given in the 
Bible correspond very closely with them."* 

But this is not the only illustration and confirmation 
which these old Assyrian monuments offer to the Sacred 
Writings. From the first invasion of the Assyrians, under 
Tiglath-Pilezer, to the restoration of Israel from Babylon, 
and the rebuilding of the temple, under Darius, the Bible 
history is full of references to the Assyrian, Babylonian, 
and Persian monarchies, and their affairs with Israel and 
Judah. And the inscribed tablets, cylinders, and temple 
tablets, and statues, are full of references which directly 
or indirectly elucidate and corroborate the Bible history, 
attesting to skeptics the truthfulness of its wonderful nar- 
rative; the very stones of Nineveh, and the ruined palaces 
of Babylon and Assyria, crying out in vindication of the 
veracity of the Bible. Already so much has been discov- 
ered as to fill several volumes, to which we must refer the 
reader for details, f 

One of the alleged historical errors greatly insisted on by 
Rationalistic commentators was the statement by Daniel, that 
Belshazzar was King of Babylon when it was taken by the 

* W. R. Cooper, Secretary Biblical Archaeological Societ}^, in 
Faith and Free Thought, page 257. 

t Rawlinson's Illustrations of Scripture. 



304 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



Medo-Persians, and that lie was slain at the storming of the 
city. Herodotus and Berosus had stated that Nabonnidus 
was king, and that he was not in the city then, but was 
afterward taken prisoner and treated generously by Cyrus. 
These accounts seemed contradictory; and as Herodotus 
and Berosus were generally esteemed respectable historians, 
the Rationalists ridicule Daniel as an erroneous writer of 
history.' But one of Sir H. Bawlinson's discoveries has 
vindicated the prophet, and also explained how the histori- 
ans were truthful too. W. Taylor, one of Bawlinson's as- 
sistants, discovered an inscribed cylinder in Ur of the 
Chaldees containing an account of the reign of this very 
Nabonnidus, which Sir Henry describes in a letter to the 
Athencmim (1854, page 341) : " The most important facts, 
however, which they disclose are that the eldest son of 
Nabonnidus was named Bel-shar-ezar, and that he was ad- 
mitted by his father to a share in the government. This 
name is undoubtedly the Belshazzar of Daniel, and thus fur- 
nishes a key to the explanation of that great historical 
problem which has hitherto defied solution. We can now 
understand how Belshazzar, as joint-king with his father, 
may have been Governor of Babylon when the city was at- 
tacked by the combined forces of the Medes and Persians, 
and may have perished in the assault which followed ; while 
Nabonnidus, leading a force to the relief of the place, was 
defeated, and was obliged to take refuge in Borsippa, capit- 
ulating after a short resistance, and being subsequently as- 
signed, according to Berosus, to an honorable retirement in 
Carmania. A minute coincidence also is thus brought to 
light, showing the accuracy of the inspired historian in one 
of the details of his narrative. Belshazzar elevates him 
to the position of G-rand Vizier, or Prime Minister, which, 
under ordinary circumstances, would be the second place of 
dignity in the empire. But Daniel represents the king as 
raising him to the third place, which we now see to be 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



305 



strictly correct, since Belsliazzar himself was the second in 
rank. Thus the weapons discharged against the "Bible ever 
recoil upon the heads of its assailants. 

Not only among the monuments of the great historic na- 
tions do we now discover corroborations of Scripture, the 
records and monuments of even obscure nations are most 
strangely turning up and being discovered, after lying un- 
noticed for centuries, as if God had reserved their testi- 
mony for the time when it would be needed and valued. 
The Bible does not refer to the history of the surrounding 
nations, save in connection with their relations to Israel; 
but it is surprising to see how many of these references are 
corroborated by recent discoveries. The Bible, for instance, 
describes* Omri as establishing a kingdom with his capital 
at Samaria, and he and his son, Ahab, making war on Mesha, 
King of Moab, conquering him and making him pay an 
annual tribute of one hundred thousand lambs and one 
hundred thousand rams, with the wool. But it came to 
pass that when Ahab was dead that the King of Moab re- 
belled against the King of Israel. 

Now amid the perpetual wars of the petty kingdoms of 
Asia, and after the utter extirpation of the Moabitish na- 
tion, the chances were millions to one against our recover- 
ing any historical monuments whatever of that people ; and 
almost infinite against recovering any which should coincide 
with the half dozen allusions to them in the Bible. But 
Mr. Klein discovered in the ruins of Dibon, one of the an- 
cient cities of Moab, and Capt. Warren recovered, the frag- 
ments of the now famous Moabite Stone, on which, in the 
old Samaritan characters, we read: "I, Mesha, son of Jobin, 
King of Moab. My father reigned over Moab thirty years, 
and I reigned after my father. I erected this altar unto 
Chemosh, who granted me victory over mine enemies, the 

• 2 Kings, chap. iv. 2 Chronicles, chap. xx. 
20 



306 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



people of Omri, King of Israel, who, together with his son, 
Ahab, oppressed Moab a long time — even forty years,"* etc. 

But space forbids even the enumeration of the corobora- 
tions of Bible history from the days of Abraham to the time 
of the first census of the Roman Empire, when Cyrenius 
was Governor of Syria the second time. In every instance 
where its monuments have spoken of biblical affairs they 
have confirmed the accuracy of the Bible history. The 
history of Great Britain, or of the United States, is not 
more authentic than, and not so accurate as, the long line of 
history recorded in the Bible. No important error has 
been proven in any of its historical statements of the 
world's history for forty centuries. This accuracy con- 
trasted with the acknowledged errors of the best histori- 
ans, is proof to every candid mind of divine direction and 
help to the sacred writers. 

Sweeping away, then, these cobwebs, we open the volume 
and form our opinion of its genuineness and authenticity 
from its own internal evidences — its nature and contents — 
and from the way in which it was used by the Hebrew nation. 

It is important at the outset to know how long these doc- 
uments have undoubtedly existed. No one denies that 
they were in existence eighteen hundred years ago. Indeed, 
the first literary attack on them which has been recorded 
was made about that time; and Josephus' defense of the 
Scriptures against Apion still exists. The very same writ- 
ings which the Protestant churches now acknowledge as 
canonical, and none other, were then acknowledged to be 
of divine authority by the Jews. It is true they bound 
their Bibles differently from ours, but the contents were 
the very same. They made up their parchments of the 
thirty-nine books in twenty-two rolls or volumes, one for 
every letter of their alphabet; putting Judges and Ruth, 

* Kecovery of Jerusalem, page 496, Gunsberg's Essay, 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



307 



the two books of Samuel, the two books of Kings, the two 
books of Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Jeremiah's Proph- 
ecy and Lamentations, and the twelve minor prophets, in 
one volume respectively. They also distinguished the five 
books of Moses as, The Law; the Psalms, Proverbs, Eccle- 
siastes, and Song of Solomon as, The Psalms; and all the 
remainder as, The Prophets* Moreover, it is well known 
that two hundred and eighty-two years before the Christian 
era, these writings were translated into Greek and widely 
circulated in all parts of the world. They were, in fact, 
not only popular, but received as of divine authority by the 
Jews at that time, read in their synagogues in public wor- 
ship, and regarded with sacred reverence. How did they 
come to receive them in this manner? 

These writings were not only acknowledged by the J ews ; 
their bitterest enemies — the Samaritans — owned the divine 
authority of the five books of Moses, and preserve an ancient 
copy of them, differing in no essential particular from the 
Hebrew version, to this day. The Samaritans always bore 
to the Hebrews such a relation as Mohammedans do to 
Christians, and the Hebrews returned the grudge with in- 
terest: "For the Jews have no dealings with the Samari- 
tans." These heathen Babylonians, four centuries or more 
before the Christian era, were somehow induced to receive 
the Pentateuch as of divine authority, and to frame some 
sort of religion upon it. Their enmity to the Jews is con- 
clusive proof that, since that time, neither Jews nor Samar- 
itans have altered the text; else the manuscripts would 
show the discrepancy. 

These books are not such as any person would forge to 
gain popularity, or to make money by. There is nothing 
in them to bribe the good opinion of influential people, or 

* Josephus against Apion, Book I. Sect. 8. Home's Intro- 
duction Chap. ii. Sect. 1. 



308 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



catch the favor of the multitude. On the contrary, their 
stern severity, and unsparing denunciation of popular vice 
and profitable sin must have secured their rejection by the 
Jewish people, had they not been constrained by undeni- 
able evidence to acknowledge their divine authority They 
set out with the assertion of the divine authority of the 
law of 3Ioses. and everywhere sharply reprove princes, 
priests, and people for breaking it. The prophets, so far from 
seeking popularity, are foolhardy enough to denounce the 
bonnets, hoops, and flounces of the ladies, and to cry, "Woe ! 
against the regular business of the most respectable note- 
shavers.* to croak against the march of intellect, and shake 
public confidence in the prosperity of their great country,"]* 
to ally themselves with fanatic abolitionists, and introduce 
agitating political questions into the pulpit ; crying, Woe to 
him that useth his neighbor s service without wages, and giv- 
eth him not for his ioork.% To crown all, they organized 
abolition clubs to procure immediate emancipation, and pub- 
lished incendiary proclamations in the cities of the slave- 
holders^ and, strange to say, they were allowed to escape 
with their lives ; and their writings were held sacred by the 
children of those very men and women they so unsparingly 
denounced; a conclusive proof that the calamities they pre- 
dicted had compelled them to acknowledge these prophets 
as the heralds of God. The proof must have been con- 
clusive, indeed, which compelled the Jews to acknowledge 
the writings of the prophets as sacred. 

Another very striking feature of these writings is, their 
mutual connection with each other. They were written at 

* Isaiah, chap. iii. 16. Ezekiel, chap, xviii. 12. 
t Jeremiah, chaps, xxi., and xxii. 16. 
% Jeremiah, chap. xxii. 18. 
§ Jeremiah, chap, xxxiv. 



MOSES AND TIIE PROPHETS. 



309 



various intervals, during a period of a thousand years' dura- 
tion, by shepherds and kings, by prophets and priests, by 
governors of States and gatherers of sycamore fruit; in 
deserts and in palaces, in camps and in cities, in Egypt and 
Syria, in Arabia and Babylon ; under the iron heel of des- 
potic oppression, and amid the liberty of the most demo- 
cratic republic the world ever saw ; yet, amid all this vari- 
ety of authorship, and change of circumstances, and lapse 
of time, they ever hold to one great theme, always assert 
the same great principles, and perpetually claim connection 
with the writers who have preceded them. There is noth- 
ing like this in the histories of other nations. Two centu- 
ries will work such changes of opinion, that you can not 
find nowadays any historian who approves the sentiments 
of Pepys or Clarendon, whatever use he may make of their 
facts. But the historians of the Bible not only refer to 
their predecessors' writings, but refer to them as of ac- 
knowledged divine authority. Thus the very latest of these 
books gives the weight of its testimony to the first — u Ancl 
they set the priests in their divisions, and the Levites in their 
courses for the service of God, which is at Jerusalem, as it 
is written in the booh of Moses."* And Daniel spake of the 
books of Moses as well known when he says, " Therefore the 
curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the 
law of Moses the servant of 6W."f The shortest book in 
the Old Testament — the prophecy of Obadiah, consisting 
only of twenty sentences — contains twenty-five allusions to 
the preceding histories and laws. The last of the prophets 
shuts up the volume with a command to "Remember the law 
of Moses." In fact, just as the epistles prove the existence 
and acknowledged authority of the gospels; so do the 
prophets prove the existence and acknowledged authority of 



* Ezra, chap. vi. 18. 
t Daniel, chap. ix. 11. 



310 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



the law of Moses. They were acknowledged not merely by 
one generation of the J ewish people, but by the nation dur- 
ing the whole period of its national existence ; and they are 
of such a character, that they must then* and now, be taken 
as one whole — all accepted, or all rejected together. 

The reader of the Old Testament will speedily find that 
these writings are not merely a connected history of the; 
nation, of great general interest, like Bancroft's or Macau- * 
lay's, but of no such special interest to any individual as to 
force him, by a sense of self-interest, or the danger of loss 
of liberty or property, to correct their errors. On the con- 
trary, every farmer in Palestine was deeply concerned in 
the truth and accuracy of the Bible ; for it contained not 
only the general boundaries of the country, and of the .par- 
ticular tribes, like the survey of the Maine boundary, or 
of Mason and Dixon's line, but it delineated particular es- 
tates also, and was, in fact, the report of the Surveyor- 
Greneral, deposited in the county court for reference, in case 
of any litigation about sale or inheritance of property.* 
The genealogies of the tribes and families were also pre- 
served in these writings ; and on the authenticity and cor- 
rectness of these records, the inheritance of every farm in 
the land depended; for as no lease ran more than fifty years, 
every farm returned to the heirs of the original settler at 
the year of jubilee. f Thus every Jewish farmer had a di- 
rect interest in these sacred records; and it would be just, 
as hard to forge records for the county courts of Ohio, and 
pass them off upon the citizens as genuine, and plead them 
in the courts as valid, as to impose at first, or falsify after- 
ward, the records of the commonwealth of Israel. 

This will appear more clearly when we consider that 
they contained also the laws of the land — the Constitution 

* Joshua, chaps, xiii.-xix. 

1 1 Chronicles, chaps, i.-ix. Leviticus, ehap, xxv. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 311 

of the United States of Israel, with the statutes at large — 
according to which every house, and farm, and garden in 
the whole country was possessed, every court of justice was 
guided,* every election was held, from the election of a 
petty constable, to that of Governor of the State,f and the 
militia enrolled, mustered, officered, and called out to the 
field of battle. | These laws prescribed the way in which 
every house must be built, regulated the weaver in weaving 
his cloth, and the tailor in making it, and the cooking of 
every breakfast, dinner and supper eaten by an Israelite 
over the world, from that day to this.§ Now, let any one 
who thinks it would be an easy matter to forge such a series 
of documents, and get people to receive and obey them, try 
his hand in making a volume of Acts of Assembly, and 
passing it off upon the people of Ohio for genuine. Let 
him bring an action into one of the courts, and persuade 
the judges to give a decision in his favor, upon the strength 
of his forged or falsified statutes, and then he may hope to 
convince us that the laws of Moses are simply a collection 
of religious tracts, which came to be held sacred through 
lapse of time, nobody knows how or why. 

Nor were these laws, and the usages thus established, 
common, and such as the people would be ready easily to 
adopt. On the contrary, Moses repeatedly asserts, and all 
ancient history shows, that they were quite peculiar to the 
Hebrew people then ; and they are to this day confined to 
the republics which, like our own, have drawn their ideas 
from the Bible. It is enough to name the common law and 
trial by jury; the armed nation; the right of free public 
assembly, free speech, free passport, and free trade; the 
election of civil, judicial, and military officers by universal 

* Exodus, chap. xxi. 6. Deuteronomy, chap. i. 16; chap. xix. 
t Exodus, chap, xviii. 21. 

X Deuteronomy, chap. xx. Numbers, chap. x. 9. 

\ Deuteronomy, chap. xxii. 8, 11, 12. Leviticus, chap, xi. 



312 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



suffrage ; the division of the land in fee-simple among the 
whole people ; the rights of women to hold real estate in 
their own right, to speak in public assemblies, and to pro- 
phetic functions; and the support of religion by the volun- 
tary offerings of the people. 

Our own republic resembles Israel as a daughter her 
mother. The land of liberty was the Bible country. The 
first republic which the world ever saw was designed by 
Almighty G-od, and revealed to the world in the Bible, and 
by the example of the United States of Israel. From that 
pattern our forefathers copied all the grand features of our 
glorious republic — the equitable distribution of the land, in 
fee-simple, among the people; securing them, by the jubi- 
lee, against the introduction of feudal tenure, and landlord- 
ism ; the abolition of a standing army, and the defense of 
the country by the militia; the election of all officers, civil 
and military, from the town constable, and the justice of 
the peace, up to the president of the republic, the Lord 
Jehovah himself, by universal suffrage — and the Federal 
Union of the twelve tribes into one nation, with township, 
county, and state governments, with a common law, com- 
mon schools, and the equality of all citizens before the law; 
the right of naturalization ; sanitary and social institutions, 
such as modern philanthropists are only beginning to dream 
of, for the elevation of the people; and all this avowedly 
held in trust for all mankind, as a fountain of blessings for 
all the families of the earth. No such ideas of liberty, 
equality, and fraternity, ever existed among the wisest 
heathen nations — the Egyptians, Persians, Greeks, or 
Romans. On the face of the whole earth there never was, 
and there is not to-day, a free republic outside of the light 
and liberty of the Bible. The so-called republics of Athens 
and Borne were hideous aristocracies, and tyrannies. From 
the Bible the men of the Continental Congress learned the 
grand truth, which they emblazoned on the forefront of 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



313 



their immortal Declaration of Independence, " That all men 
are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights 
to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;" thus plant- 
ing the rights of man upon the only immovable basis — the 
throne of the eternal God. 

But there were other features of the Mosaic legislation 
so far in advance of the ideas of our modern Materialism as 
not to have been even yet suggested in our social congresses, 
nor even dreamt of by our most advanced Christian philan- 
thropists, in their endeavors after the elevation of the 
masses. Moses' idea was the prevention of pauperism, and 
of the conflict between labor and capital, and of the gam- 
bling speculating fever, and the formation of an independent, 
intelligent, joyous, religious, healthy, and thrifty people, 
well-bred, well-fed, well-lodged, able to fight their foes on 
the battle-field, to reap their ridge on the harvest-field, to 
enjoy the blessings of healthy families, and to rejoice before 
the Lord. A volume would be needed to develop the social 
bearings of the laws of the Hebrews. We can only suggest 
for consideration the laws regarding inalienability of the 
homestead, and the bankrupt law; the laws of marriage and 
inheritance ; the laws of servitude and wages ; the sanitary 
laws regarding building, clothing, bathing, eating, and con- 
tagion ; the protection of the rights of animals ; the disper- 
sion of the educated class; and the three great national 
festivals, during which the whole people were released from 
the labors of the field, and of the kitchen, and enjoyed 
during the eight summer days of each picnic such an ex- 
citement of social enjoyment, religious fervor, and political 
patriotism, as modern Christendom anticipates in the millen- 
nium, but which neither Church nor State has, as yet, syste- 
matically attempted to nurture. 

That the Hebrews did not obey the law, and so did not 
enjoy the happiness obedience would have secured, is only 
what God foresaw, and foretold repeatedly, with solemn 



314 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



warning of the disastrous degradation to which disobedience 
to God's laws must ever reduce man. Nevertheless, even 
their very imperfect conformity to these institutions gave 
them such superiority of blood and breeding to their un- 
godly neighbors, that they have survived the most powerful 
nations, and, in spite of dispersion, exile, disfranchisement, 
and persecution, they exist as a distinct people, superior in- 
tellectually, commercially, and morally to all the heathen 
nations at this day. How much higher had been their po- 
sition had they fully obeyed the law. 

Our argument is, that this law of liberty, equality, fra- 
ternity, and religion, was worthy of our Father in heaven, 
and a seed of blessing to all the families of the earth. 

To a Jew living before the coming of Christ, the unani- 
mous testimony of his nation, confirmed by all the com- 
memorative observances of the sacrifices, the passover, 
the Sabbath, and the jubilee, by the reading of the law and 
the prophets, and the singing of the historical psalms in 
the temple and the synagogues, by the execution of the laws 
of Moses in the courts, and by the very existence of his 
nation as a distinct people, separate from all the other na- 
tions — could leave no doubt that laws so peculiar and benef- 
icent must have been enacted by a wisdom superior to that 
of man, and their observance imposed by divine authority ; 
nor that the miracles by which these laws were authenti- 
cated, and the national existence of the people of Israel 
was secured, were genuine, and divine. The chain of his- 
torical and internal evidence is too strong to be broken, 
while the Jewish nation exists. 

But yet this historical and internal evidence of the au- 
thority of the Old Testament is but the smallest part of 
that which we possess, who have the testimony of Christ on 
this subject. For this testimony removes the question from 
the mists of antiquity, and even from the debatable ground 
of historic certainty, and resolves the whole process of 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



315 



searching for, and comparing and examining a host of sec- 
ond-hand witnesses, into the easy and certain one of hear- 
ing the Author himself say, whether he acknowledges this 
Book to be his or not. Christians receive the Old Testa- 
ment as the Word of God, because Jesus says so. 

Now, reader, it is of the utmost importance that you 
should stop just here, and give a plain, confident answer to 
these questions : Dost thou believe upon the Son of God ? 
Is Jesus the Messiah of whom Moses in the law, and the 
prophets, did write ? Are you perfectly satisfied of the 
truth of the New Testament, and willing to venture your 
eternal salvation upon the words of Christ contained in it? 

For, if not, of what use is it for you to trouble yourself 
about the Old Testament? You might as well waste your 
time in examining the genuineness of the bills of a broken 
bank ; they may be genuine or they may be forgeries ; but 
who cares? They will never be paid. If the first promises 
of the bank of heaven, to send the Messiah eighteen hun- 
dred years ago, have been fulfilled, its other paper may be 
also valuable ; if not, it must be equally worthless. If the 
New Testament be not of divine authority, you may place 
the prophets on the same shelf with the Poems of Ossian; 
and then follows the serious consequence, that there is not 
a grain of hope left for you or for any man on earth. If 
Jesus be indeed an Almighty Savior, and if he has indeed 
risen from the dead, then, through the power of his mighty 
love, your filthy soul may be washed from its sins, and your 
mortal body may be raised from the rottenness of the grave. 
But if Christ be not risen, you are yet in your sins. You 
have no notion that any of the gods of the heathen, or the 
precepts of the Koran, can purify your heart. You know 
well that Infidelity never sanctified any of your comrades. 
Conscience tells you that you are not any better now than 
you were a year ago, but worse. You are yet in your sins; 
and in them you must live and die ! Aye, while your im- 



316 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



mortal soul lives, while the laws of human nature continue, 
you must carry those brands of infamy on your character, 
and daily progress from bad to worse ; sinking deeper and 
deeper in the contempt of all intelligent beings ; and, were 
there no other avenger, in the remorse and despair of your 
own mind, you must experience the horrors of perdition. 
Jesus, able to save to the uttermost, all that come unto God 
by him, is your only hope. There is none other name given 
under heaven among men whereby we must be saved. If 
his gospel be true, you may be saved ; if it is false, you must 
be damned. 

If you have the shadow of a doubt of the truth of the 
New Testament, go over the subject again; re-read the for- 
mer chapters of this book ; pray to God for light and truth ; 
above all, read the Book again and again ; and if, in your 
case, as in that of one of the most famous teachers of Ger- 
man Neology — De Wette — the careful study of the New 
Testament impels you to rush through all the mists of doubt 
to the higher standpoint of a lofty faith, and the sunshine 
of real religion; and if with him you can now say, "Only 
this one thing I know, that in no other name is there salva- 
tion than in the name of Jesus Christ the crucified, and 
that for humanity there is nothing higher than the incarna- 
tion of Deity set before us in him, and the kingdom of God 
established by him,"* you may then go on with your inquiry 
into the divine authority of the Old Testament. With the 
Master himself before you, the Author, the Inspirer, by 
whom, and for whom, the prophets spake, and to whom all 
the Scriptures point, you will not think of wasting time in 
examining second hand evidence; but go direct to Jesus 
himself. His testimony will not be merely so much addi- 
tional testimony — another candle added to the chandelier by 
whose light you have perused the evidences of the Scrip- 



* Preface to Exposition of the Apocalypse. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



317 



tures ; it will shine out on your soul as the light of the Sun 
of Righteousness with healing on his wings. Every word 
from his lips will awaken in your heart the voice from 
heaven, " This is my beloved Son. Hear him." What saith 
Christ, then, respecting the Old Testament? 

The moment you open the New Testament to make this 
inquiry, you are met by a reference to the Old. " The book 
of the generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son 
of Abraham" is its formal title; and the most cursory pe- 
rusal tells you that you have taken up, not a separate and 
independent work, which you can profitably peruse and under- 
stand without much reference to some foregoing volumes — as 
one might read Abbott's Life of Napoleon without needing at 
the same time to study the History of the Crusades — but 
that you have taken up a continuation of some former work — 
the last volume in fact of the Old Testament — and that you 
can not understand even the first chapter without a careful 
reading of the foregoing volumes. Before you have finished 
the first chapter you meet with the most unequivocal asser- 
tion of the harmony of the gospels and the prophecies, and 
of the divine authority of both — u N~ow all this teas done 
that it might be fulfilled lohieh was spoken of the Lord by 
the prophet" etc. The whole tenor of the New Testament 
corresponds to this beginning, teaching that the birth, doc- 
trine, miracles, life, death, resurrection, ascension, and sec- 
ond coming of the Lord, are the fulfillments of the Old 
Testament promises and prophecies ; of which no less than 
a hundred and thirty-nine are expressly quoted, beginning 
with Moses and ending with Malachi. 

We can not explain this by saying, with the mythical 
school of interpreters, that this was merely the opinion of 
the writers of the gospels and of the Jews of their age; 
whose longings for the Messiah led them to imagine some 
curious coincidences between the events of Christ's life and 
the utterances of these ancient oracles 1 to be ready fulfill- 



318 MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 

ments; and that Christ did not deem it needful in all cases 
to undeceive them. For to suppose that Christ — the Truth 
— would sanction or connive at any such sacrilegious decep- 
tion, is at once to deprive him, not only of his divine char- 
acter, but of all claim to common honesty. So far from the 
Jews longing for any such events as those which fulfilled the 
prophecies, they despised the Messiah in whom they were 
fulfilled, and refused to believe in him; and his disciples 
were as far from the gospel ideal of the Messiah, when Jesus 
needed to reproach them with, u O fooh, and slow of heart 
to believe all that the prophets have spoken."* It was not 
the Jews, nor yet the disciples, but the Lord himself who 
perpetually insisted on the divine authority of the Old 
Testament as the Word of his Father, and the sufficient at- 
testation of his own divine character, after this manner: 
"Ye have not his word abiding in you; for whom he hath 
sent, him ye believe not. Search the Scriptures; for in them 
ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify 
of me. * * * Had ye believed Moses, ye would have be- 
lieved me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his 
writings, how shall ye believe my icords? :, j 

His first recorded sermon contains a remarkable and sol- 
emn attestation to the divine authority of the Old Testa- 
ment, and of his own relation to it as its substance and sup- 
porter. " Think not that I am come to destroy the law, and 
the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For 
verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or 
one tittle shall in no xcise pass from the law, till all be ful- 
filled^ The whole of this discourse is an exposition of 
the true principles of the Old Testament, stripping off the 
rubbish by which tradition had made void the law of God, 
and enforcing its precepts by the sanction of his divine au- 

* Luke, chap. xxiv. 25. 

t John, chap. v. 38, 39, 46, 47. 

% Matthew, chap, v/17, 18. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



319 



thority. And in one of his last discourses after his resur- 
rection : 11 Beginning at Moses, and the prophets, he expounded 
unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. 
X* * * And he said unto them, These are the words 
which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all 
things must he fulfilled which were written in the law of 
Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning 
me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might 
understand the Scriptures 

In this distinct enumeration of the whole of the Scrip- 
tures of the Old Testament; in the assertion that they all 
treated of him, and that their principal predictions were 
fulfilled in him ; and in his bestowal of divine illumination 
to enable them to understand these divine oracles — we have 
such an indorsement of their character by the Truth him- 
self, as must command the faith and obedience of every be- 
liever yi him. Had no objections been raised against par- 
ticular doctrines or features of the Old Testament, we 
should stop here; perfectly satisfied with the attestations 
to the truth of its history, given by the continual refer- 
ences, and to the authority of its precepts, by the solemn 
formal declarations of the Son of God. But some popular 
objections to its completeness and perfection demand a brief 
notice. 

1. The general character of the Old Testament being 
then ascertained beyond doubt, our first inquiry must be as 
to the integrity and completeness of the collection. For it 
is manifest that their divine authority being admitted, any 
attempt to add to them any human writings, or to take 
away those which were from God, would be a crime so seri- 
ous in its consequences, that it could not escape the notice 
of him who severely rebuked even the verbal traditions by 
which the Jews made void the law of God. Now we are 



* Luke, chap. xxiv. throughout. 



320 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



told by some that a great many inspired books have been 
lost; and they enumerate the prophecy of Enoch; the 
book of the Wars of the Lord ; the book of Joshua ; the 
book of Iddo the seer ; the book of Nathan the prophet • 
the acts of Rehoboam ; the book of J ehu, the son of Han- 
ani ; and the five books of Solomon, on trees, beasts, fowls, 
serpents, and fishes ; which are alluded to in the Bible. 

If the case were so, it is difficult to see what objection 
could be raised against the divine authority of the books 
we have, because of the divine authority of those we have 
not ; for it is not supposed that one divinely inspired book 
would contradict another. Nor yet can we see how the loss 
of these books should disprove their inspiration, much less 
the inspiration of those which remain, any more than the 
want of a record of the multitude of words and works of 
Jesus himself which were never committed to writing,* 
should be an argument against the divine authority of the 
Sermon on the Mount. It will hardly be asserted that God 
is bound to reveal to us everything that the human race 
ever did, and to preserve such records through all time, or 
lose his right to demand our obedience to a plain revelation 
of his will ; or that we do well to neglect the salvation of 
our own souls until we obtain an infallible knowledge of the 
acts of Rehoboam. 

But there is not the shadow of a proof that any of these 
were inspired books, or that some of them were books at 
all. The Bible nowhere says that Enoch wrote his proph- 
ecy, or that Solomon read his discourses on natural history ; 
nor of what religious interest they would have been to us 
any more than the hard questions of the Queen of Sheba, 
and his answers to them. Though the loss of these ancient 
chronicles may be regretted by the antiquarian, the Chris- 
tian feels not at all concerned about it ; knowing as he does, 



* John, chap. zx. 30. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



321 



on the testimony of Christ, that the Holy Scriptures, as he 
and his apostles delivered them to us, contain all that we 
need to know in order to repent of our sins, lead holy lives, 
and go to heaven ; and that we have the very same Bible of 
which Jesus said: u They have Moses and the prophets; 
let them hear them. * * * If they hear not Moses and 
the prophets, neither will they he persuaded though one rose 
from the dead."* 

2. Another objection is, that the religion of the Old Test- 
ament was essentially different from that of the New. It 
is at once acknowledged, that the light which Christ shed 
on our relations to God, and to our brethren of mankind, 
is so much clearer than that of the Old Testament that we 
see our duties more plainly, and are more inexcusable for 
neglecting them, than those who had not the benefit of Christ's 
teaching. And no objection can be raised against God for 
not sending his Son sooner, or for not giving more light to 
the world before his coming, unless- it can be shown that he 
is debtor to mankind, and that they were making a good use 
of the light he gave them. So that the question is not, 
Did God give as full and expanded instructions to the 
Church in her infancy as he has given in her maturity? but, 
Did he give instructions of a different character? It is not, 
Did Christ reveal more than Moses ? but, Did Christ con- 
tradict Moses ? And here, at the very outset, we are met 
by Christ's own solemn formal disclaimer of any such in- 
tention : " Think not that I am come to destroy the law and 
the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill" 
And as to the actual working of the Christian religion, 
when Paul is asked, u Is the law then against the promises 
of Godf"\ he indignantly replies, u God forbid!" 

But it is urged, " Judaism is not Christianity. You have 

* Luke, chap. xvi. 29. 
t Galatians, chap. iii. 21. 
21 



322 



MOSES AND TIIE PROPHETS. 



changed the Sabbath, abolished the sacrifices, trampled upon 
the rules of living, eating, and visiting only with the pe- 
culiar people, £ou neglect the passover. and drop circum- 
cision, the seal of the covenant, all on the authority of 
Christ. Do you mean to say that these are not essential 
elements of the Old Testament religion? " 

Undoubtedly. Outward ceremonies of any kind never 
were essential parts of religion. "I will have mercy and not 
sacrifice," is an Old Testament proverb, which clearly tells 
us that outward ceremonies are merely means toward the 
great end of all religion. "The law" says the Holy Ghost, 
by the pen of Paul, " icas our sclioolmaster to bring us to 
Christ'' The bread of heavenly truth is served out to 
God's children now on ten thousand wooden tables, instead 
of one brazen altar ; but it is made of the same corn of 
heaven, it is dispensed by the same hand of love, to a larger 
family, it is true, but received and eaten in the exercise of 
the very same religious feelings, by any hearer of the gos- 
pel in Xew York, as by Abraham on Moriah. By faith in 
Christ the sinner now is justified, "Even as Abraham be- 
lieved God, and it icas imputed to him for righteousness " So 
says one who knew both law and gospel well. li Do ice then 
make void the law through faith ? Gael forbid! Yea, ice 
establish the law ! " The Epistles to the Romans and to the 
Hebrews are just demonstrations of this truth, that the 
law was the blossom, the gospel the fruit. 

But it is alleged that the religion of the Old Testament 
could not but be defective, as it wanted the doctrines of 
immortality and the resurrection; of which, it is alleged, the 
Old Testament saints were ignorant. 

It were easy to prove, from their own words and conduct, 
that Job, Abraham, David, and Daniel, were not ignorant 
of these great doctrines.* But the manner in which our 

* Job, chap. xix. 25. Psalm xvi. 10. Hebrews, chap. xi. 13-16. 
Daniel, chap. xii. 2, 3. 



MOSES AND THE PROPIIETS. 



323 



Lord proves the truth of the resurrection, by a reference 
to it as undeniably taught in the Old Testament, must ever 
silence this objection. "But as touching the resurrection of 
the dead, have ye not read that which ivas spoken unto you 
by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, the God of 
Isaac, and the God of Jacob ? God is not the God of the 
dead, but of the living."* 

3. But it is objected the Hebrew Jehovah tolerated and 
approved polygamy, slavery, and divorce ; and, in general, a 
low code of morals among the Hebrews. 

But we demand to know what standard of morals our ob- 
jectors adopt? That of the ancient oriental world in which 
Israel lived ? Then the laws of J ehovah were very far in 
advance of that age. The slave had his blessed Sabbath 
rest secured to him ; which is more than modern civilization 
can secure for her railway slaves ; his master was forbidden 
to treat him cruelly ; and the maid-servant's honor was pro- 
tected by the best means then known ; while the Sacred 
Writings held up for example the primitive example of mar- 
riage, interposed the formality of a legal document before 
divorce, and elevated the family far above the degraded 
state of the heathen around them. 

But the objector falls back on the morals of Christen- 
dom, the civilization of the nineteenth century, and judges 
the laws of Moses by that standard. Very well. This is 
simply to say that our ideas have been raised to the stand- 
ard of Christianity; and then the objection is that the laws 
of Moses are not so spiritual and elevated as the precepts of 
Christ. Our Lord himself asserts the same thing. He 
says Moses tolerated divorce because of the hardness of the 
people's hearts ; but from the beginning it was not so. And 
Paul (Hebrews viii. 6, 7) alleges the imperfection of Moses' 
law as a good reason for the introduction of a better cove- 



* Matthew, chap. xxii. 31, 32. 



324 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



nant. The Bible itself then recognizes an advance from 
good to better, the path of the just shining more and more 
unto the perfect day. 

But then it is asked, Is God the Author of an imperfect 
law ? Could God give a defective code of morals ? The 
question entirely misses the design of God's revelation as a 
process of educating his children. Suppose we ask, Could 
God speak Hebrew — a language so defective in philosophical 
terms? God must condescend to the mental, and even, in 
some degree, to the moral level of mankind if he is to reach 
us at all. All education must begin low, and rise from 
step to step. The A, B, C of morals must be first learned. 
The whole analogy of providence shows this to be God's 
method of procedure. The kingdom of God is like the 
growing seed ; first the blade, then the ear, then the full 
corn in the ear. Gradual, and even slow, progress is the law 
of nature. 

Our modern civilization, which is so proudly invoked, is 
very far indeed from any such perfection as might enable 
us to look down upon Moses' legislation with contempt. 
We have only to name our standing armies and conscrip- 
tions; our national promises to pay debts, which no one 
ever expects to pay; our laws regarding drunkenness, and 
our revenues derived from the licenses for the sale of 
liquors; the utter failure of our attempts to put down bet- 
ting, gambling, and stock and gold speculations, prostitu- 
tion, bribery, frauds, and plundering of the public funds; 
to convince ourselves that there are many things law can 
not do, even in this nineteenth century of civilization. 

Our little progress, such as it is, has not been made all 
at once, or by one great advance. God gives mankind bless- 
ings by degrees. Tie gave the mariner's compass to the 
fourteenth century, the printing press and America to the 
fifteenth, the Bible in the vulgar tongue to the sixteenth, 
parliamentary government to the seventeenth, the steam 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



325 



engine to the eighteenth, railroads and the telegraph to the 
nineteenth. One might as well cavil at his providence for 
not giving the Hebrews sewing machines, Hoe's printing 
presses, and daily newspapers, when they entered into Ca- 
naan, as for delaying to give them the elements of Chris- 
I tian civil law, and social life, before they were able to value 
and to use them. 

As it was, Moses' law was so far in advance of their own 
ideas of propriety, and so far in advance of those of all the 
people around them, that they were continually falling back 
from it, and rebelling against it, and subjecting themselves to 
the discipline which God had threatened for disobedience. 
Thus they were kept ever looking upward to a higher 
model. Their transgressions must be confessed as sins, and 
atoned for by bloody sacrifices, declaring the transgressor 
worthy of death. Their consciences were educated to the 
idea of holiness, an idea utterly wanting among the heathen; 
and the law became a powerful motive power, urging them 
to higher and holier lives, and preparing them to receive 
the higher and holier example and precepts of Christ. 

The imperfection, then, of the law of Moses, so far from 
being an evidence of the human origin of the Bible, is a 
mark of the infinite wisdom of the great Lawgiver in adapt- 
ing his legislation to the condition of his people ; and while 
tolerating for the time then present an imperfect state of 
society, just as at this time he t-olerates a Christendom far 
below the gospel standard, yet implanting in the minds of 
his people principles of righteousness and love which were 
certain eventually to raise them to the high level of the 
kingdom of God. This, then, is simply an instance of the 
general law of divine development. 

4. Again, however, it is contended, "that the morality of 
the Old Testament was narrow and bigoted ; requiring, in- 
deed, the observance of charity to the covenant people, but 
allowing Israel to hate all others as enemies, and as well ex- 



326 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



pressed in the text, Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate 
thine enemy."* 

But let it be noticed, that this is no text of Scripture, 
nor does our Lord so quote it He does not say it is so 
written, but, ye have heard it said by them of old time. The 
first part is God's truth; the second is the devil's addition 
to it, which Christ clears away and denounces. Tt were 
easy to quote multitudes of passages from the Old Testa- 
ment, commanding Israel to show kindness to the stranger, 
and a whole host of promises, that in them all the families 
of the earth should be blessed ; any one of which would 
sufficiently refute the foolish notion, that the morality of 
the Old Testament was geographical, and its charity merely 
national. But the simple fact, that the most sublime sanc- 
tion of world-wide benevolence which ever fell even from 
the lips of Christ himself, was uttered by him as the sum 
and substance of the teachings of the Old Testament, con- 
clusively confutes this dogma. The Golden Bule was no 
new discovery, unless its Author was mistaken, for he says: 
" Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should 
do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and 
the prophets. "f He declares the very basis and founda- 
tion of the whole Old Testament religion to be those eter- 
nal principles of godliness and charity, which he quotes in 
the very words of the law : " Then one of them, which ioas 
a lawyer, ashed him a question, tempting him, and saying, 
Master, ivhich is the great commandment in the law? Jesus 
said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God ivith all 
thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This 
is the first and great commandment. And the second is like 
unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these 
two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."^ 

* Matthew, chap. v. 43. 

t Matthew, chap. vii. 12. 

± Matthew, chap. xxii. 35-40. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



327 



The law and the prophets, then, taught genuine world-wide 
benevolence, Christ being witness ; and the moral law of the 
Old Testament is the moral law of the New Testament, if 
we may believe the Lawgiver. 

5. Still, it is alleged, "it can not be denied that the writ- 
ers of the Old Testament breathed a spirit of vindictive- 
ness, and imprecated curses on their enemies, utterly at 
variance with the precepts of the gospel, which commands 
us to bless and curse not ; and even in their solemn devotions 
uttered sentiments unfit for the mouth of any Christian; 
nor that their views of the character of God were stern and 
gloomy, and that they represented the Hebrew Jehovah as 
an unforgiving and vengeful being, utterly different from 
the kind and loving Father whom Christ delighted to reveal." 

This, if the truth were told, is the grand objection to the 
Old Testament. The holy and righteous sin-hating God, 
presented in its history, is the object of dislike. The God 
who drowned the old world, destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah 
by fire from heaven, commanded the extermination of the 
lewd and bloody Canaanites, thundered his curses against 
sinners of every land and every age, saying, " Cursed be he 
that confirmcth not all the words of this law to do them" 
requiring all the people to say Amen,* is not the God whom 
Universalists can find in their hearts to adore. A mild, easy, 
good-natured being, who would allow men to live and die in 
sin without any punishment, would suit them better. They 
try to think that he is altogether such an one as themselves, 
and an approver of their sin. 

But it is worth while to inquire whether the Father of 
our Lord Jesus Christ be in this respect anything different 
from the Hebrew Jehovah, or whether the gospel has in the 
least degree lessened his displeasure against iniquity. Paul 
thought not that he was a different person, when he said : 



* Deuteronomy, chap, xxvii. 26. 



323 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



£; We know him iclw hatT} said. Vengeance belongeth unto me, 
I wiU recompense, saith the Lord."* Jesus thought not that 
he was more lenient to sinners when he cried, c: Woe unto 
thee, Chorazin! Woe unto thee. Bethsaida! * * * Thou, 
Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought 
down to hell * * * It shall be more tolerable for the 
laud of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee."j It 
is not in the Old ^Testament, but in the New, that we are 
told that Jesus himself shall come "In faming fire taking 
vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the 
gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall be punished 
v:ith everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, 
and from the glory of his power.^X It is not an old. bigoted 
Hebrew prophet giving a vision of the Hebrew Jehovah, 
but the beloved disciple who leaned on Jesus' breast, pictur- 
ing the Savior himself, who says: "He was clothed with a 
vesture dipped in blood ; and. his name is called the Word of 
God. And the armies ichich were in heaven followed him 
upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean And 
out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should 
smite the nations ; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron ; 
and he treadtth the wine-press of the fierceness and wrath of 
Almighty God ' ^ 

Let no man imagine that the Xew Testament offers im- 
punity to the wicked, or that the Old Testament denies 
mercy to the repenting sinner, or that Christ exhibited any 
other God than the God of Abraham, Isaac and J acob — the 
same Hebrew Jehovah who commands the wicked to forsake 
his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and to return 
unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our 
God, for he icill abundantly pardan.\\ It is exceedingly 

* Hebrews, chap. x. 30. 
t ^Matthew, chap. xi. 
% 2 Thessalonians, chap. i. 
\ Revelation, chap. xix. 
I Isaiah, chap. Iv. 

V 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



329 



strange that those who dwell upon the paternal character 
of God, as a distinctive feature of Christ's personal teach- 
ing, should have forgotten that the hymns of the Old Test- 
ament church, a thousand years before his coming, wore 
full of this endearing relation ; that it was by the first He- 
brew prophet that the Hebrew Jehovah declared, "Israel is 
my son, even my first-horn; and I say unto thee, Let my son 
go, that he may serve me; "* and that by the last of them he 
urges Israel to obedience by this tender appeal : 11 If I he a 
father, where is mine honor f "f It was not Christ, but 
David — one of those gloomy, stern, Hebrew prophets — who 
penned that noble hymn to our Father in heaven, which 
Christ illustrated in his Sermon on the Mount : 

" The Lord is merciful and gracious, 
Slow to anger and plenteous in mercy. 
He will not always chide, 
Neither will he keep his anger forever. 
He hath not dealt with us after our sins, 
Nor rewarded us according to our iniquities ; 
For as the heaven is high above the earth, 
So great is his mercy to them that fear him ; 
As far as the East is from the West, 
So far hath he removed our transgressions from us. 
Like as a father pitieth his children, 
So the Lord pitieth them that fear him." — Psalm ciii. 

It is utter ignorance of the Old Testament which prompts 
any one to imagine that it presents any other character of 
God than u Tha Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, 
long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping 
mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression 
and sin, and that will hy no means clear the guilty."% This 

* Exodus, chap. iv. 22. 

t Malachi, chap. i. 

% Exodus, chap, xxxiv. 



330 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



is the name which God proclaimed to Moses, and this is 
the character which he proclaimed in Christ, when he 
cried on the cross : u My God, my God, why hast thou for- 
saken me f But thou art holy, thou that inhabitest the 
praises of Israel."* Justice and mercy are united in Christ 
dying for the ungodly. 

It is untrue to say that the prophets of the Old Testa- 
ment were actuated by a spirit of malice, or of revenge for 
personal injuries as such, in praying for, or prophesying 
destruction on the inveterate enemies of God and his cause. f 
Of all Scripture characters, David has been most defamed 
for vindictiveness ; but surely never was man more free 
from any such spirit, than the persecuted fugitive, who, 
with his enemy in his hand in the cave, and his confidential 
advisers urging him to take his life, cut off his skirt instead 
of his head ; and on another occasion prevented the stroke 
which would have smitten the sleeping Saul to the earth, 
and sent back even the spear and the cruse of water, the 
trophies of his generosity. When cursed himself, and de- 
famed as a vengeful shedder of blood by the Benjamite, he 
could restrain the fury of his followers, protect the life of 
the ruffianly traitor, and thus appeal to God as the witness 
of his innocence : 

" Lord, my God ! if I have done this, 
If there be iniquity in my hands. 

If I have rewarded evil to him that was at peace with me, 
Yea I have delivered him that without cause was mine 
enemy."! 

It is true that he does bitterly curse several living per- 
sons j of whom it is observable that some had done him no 
sort of personal injury; as Doeg the Edomite — the Nana 

* Psalm xxii. 

t 2 Timothy, chap, iv. 14, 

% Psalm vii. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



331 



Sahib of his day — who anticipated the scenes of Cawnpore, 
in the streets of Nob, by mercilessly butchering unoffend- 
ing men, helpless women, and innocent babes. But surely 
no friend of humanity can imagine that it is improper that 
the chief magistrate of Israel, anointed for the very pur- 
pose of being a terror to evil doers, should express his 
righteous indignation against such atrocities ; nor confound 
such public execration with the petty gnawings of private 
revenge. Still less can the fearer of God doubt the propri- 
ety of his expressing by the mouth of his prophet, that 
displeasure he signally displayed by his providence, scath- 
ing and blasting the accursed wretch into a terror to all 
bloody and deceitful men who shall read their own warning 
in his doom. 

" God shall likewise destroy thee forever, 
He shall take thee away and pluck thee from thy dwelling, 
And root thee out of the land of the living."* 
We have the most solemn assurance, that every one of 
the historical incidents of Scripture is recorded for our in- 
struction, and that every prophecy gives a lesson to all ages. 
( 'JSfow all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and 
they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of 
the world are come"^ The imprecations of the Bible 
against individual sinners are the gibbets on which these 
malefactors are hung up for warning to all men to flee the 
crimes that brought them to that fate. 

It is put beyond the possibility of doubt, by the combined 
testimony of the Lord and his apostles, that by far the 
greater number of the curses which David uttered, he spoke 
in the person of Christ himself, of whom he was a type; 
and with direct reference to the crimes and punishment of 
his enemies. Thus the Sixty-ninth Psalm, and the One 
hundred and ninth, pre-eminently the cursing Psalms, are 

* Psalms vii. and lii. and 2 Samuel, chaps, xvi., xxi. and xxii. 
N t 1 Corinthians, chap. x. 



332 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



most explicitly and repeatedly asserted by Christ, by Peter, 
and by John, to belong to Christ, and to express his very 
words : "This scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which 
the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concern- 
ing Judas, which ivas guide to them that took Jesus. * * *• 
For it is ivritten in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation 
be desolate, and let no man dwell therein. And, His bishopric 
let another take."* If any one feels reluctant to imagine 
that such cursings should fall from the lips of the merciful 
Savior, let him remember that the most awful curse which 
shall ever fall on the ears of terrified men shall be pro- 
nounced by Jesus himself, u Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting 
fire, prepared for the devil and his angels "f The solemn 
facts of the Bible will not accommodate themselves to our 
likes and dislikes. Christ loves righteousness and hates in- 
iquity ; in the Bible he takes leave to say so, and he expects 
his people to share his feelings, and to be willing to express 
them on fit occasions. 

Personal revenge, and curses for mere personal injuries, 
are forbidden in the New Testament as well as in the Old. 
But it was an apostle of Jesus Christ who cried, 11 If any 
man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed. 
Though we or an angel from heaven bring any other gospel 
unto you, let him be accursed" % Nor until we can in some 
measure feel this holy indignation against sin, and this 
burning desire to see all tyranny, superstition, bribery, 
licentiousness, and profanity, crushed and banished from 
the earth, can we pray in truth 11 Thy kingdom come."- 
Still less can we be prepared for the rejoicings of heaven 
over the conquest of the enemies of God and man : "Rejoice 

* John, chap. ii. 17; chap, xv.25; chap. xix. 28. Acts, chap. i. 20. 
t Matthew, chap, xxv. 41, 

% Galatians, chap. i. 9. 1 Corinthians, chap. xvi. 22. Kevelation, 
chaps, xix., xx, and xxi. 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



333 



over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets, 
for God hath avenged you on her." 

Reader, you hope to go to heaven ; but it may be a dif- 
ferent place from what you dream of. Did you ever study 
the employment of the saints there ? Are you washed from 
your sins ? Is your mind purified from your carnal notions ? 
Unless a man be born again he can not see the kingdom of 
God. Are your likes and dislikes, your sentiments and 
sympathies, your understanding and your will, all brought 
into subjection to Christ? Can you heartily love and adore 
a sin-hating, sin-avenging God? Or do you shrink back in 
terror or dislike from God's denunciations of wrath against 
the wicked ? Would your benevolence lead you to deal 
alike with the righteous and the wicked ; and to abhor the 
thought of destroying them that destroy the earth ? Then 
how will you join in the hallelujahs of heaven; for God's 
judgments are the themes of thanksgiving and praise from 
saints and angels there, and this is their song : 

11 Hallelujah, salvation, and glory, and honor, and power, 
unto the Lord, our God, for true and righteous are his judg- 
ments ; for he hath judged the great whore, which did cor- 
rupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the 
blood of his servants at her hands. And again they said, 
Hallelujah! And her smoke rose up for ever and ever. And 
the four and twenty ciders and the four living creatures fell 
down and icorshipcd God that sat on the throne, saying, 
Amen! Hallelujah! And a voice came out of the throne^ 
saying, Praise our God, all ye his servants; and ye that fear 
him, both small and great. And I heard as it were the voice 
of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and 
as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Hallelujah ! For 
the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth."* 

And now, if this be the character of God, if he be indeed 

* Kevelation, chaps, xi'x., xx. and xxi. 



334 



MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. 



one who hates iniquity, and punishes impenitent sinners, we 
need not wonder that those who spake his word should utter 
imprecations, either in the Old Testament or in the New; 
but rather bless the mercy which warns before justice 
strikes, which hangs the red lantern over the abyss, and 
which seeks by the terrors of the Lord to persuade men 
from perdition. The curses of the Bible are denounced! 
against the enemies of Grod, with the design of showing^ 
sinners their danger, and leading them to repentance. 

The conclusion, then, of our investigation is, that the Old 
Testament is the Word of Grod no less than the New; that 
it is in no respect contrary to it ; that all its parts — the law 
and the prophets, and the Psalms — are of divine authority; 
that all its contents were written by divine direction, whether 
prophecy or history, ceremony or morality, promise or 
threatening, curses or blessings. It is of the Old Testament 
principally that the Holy Ghost declares : 11 All Scripture is 
given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, 
for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; 
that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished 
unto all good works."* 


* 2 Timothy, chap. iii. 16, 17. 



CHAPTER X. 



JNFIDELITY y&MONG THE JStAF^S. 



A little or superficial knowledge of philosophy may incline a 
man's mind to Atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's 
minds about to religion. — Bacon. 



When skeptics, who are determined not to believe in the 
Bible, find the historical evidences of its genuineness, au- 
thority, and inspiration, impregnable against the assaults of 
criticism, they turn their attention to some other mode of 
attack, and of late years have selected their weapons from 
the physical sciences. The argument thus raised is, that the 
Bible can not be the Word of God, because it asserts facts 
contrary to the teachings of science. Of this warfare Vol- 
taire may be considered the leader, in his celebrated attack 
on the chemical processes recorded in Scripture ; in which 
he exposed himself to the ridicule of all the chemists and 
metallurgists in Europe, by denying the possibility of dis- 
solving the golden calf ; the solution of gold being actually 
found in every gilder's shop in Paris, and known even to 
coiners and forgers, for hundreds of years before he made 
this notable discovery. The result was ominous. 

The whole circle of the sciences has been ransacked for 
such arguments, and especially has every new discovery 
been hailed by skeptics as an ally to their cause, until fur- 
ther acquaintance has demonstrated that the stranger, too, 
was in alliance with religion. Thus, when a few years ago, 
Geology began to upheave his titantic form, he was eagerly 

(335) 



336 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



greeted as a being undoubtedly not of celestial, but ratter 
of subterranean, or even of infernal origin, willing to em- 
ploy his gigantic powers in the assault upon heaven, and 
able to overwhelm the Bible and the Church under the ruins 
of former worlds. But now that skeptics have discovered 
the proofs he gives of the presence of the Almighty on this 
world of ours, they are getting shy of his acquaintance, and 
are cultivating the society of some still more juvenile visi- 
tors from the chambers of animal magnetism and biology. 
The same scene will doubtless be acted over again; and 
these infantile strangers, when able to give distinct utter- 
ance to the facts of their developed consciousness, will bear 
testimony to the truth of Grod. 

Such objections to the Bible are very rarely brought for- 
ward by truly scientific men. It is a phenomenon, like the 
advent of a great comet, to find a man profoundly versed 
in science attack the Bible. Your third or fourth rate 
men of learning attain distinction in this field. An anti- 
Bible writer or lecturer has generally been promoted to that 
high eminence from the school-room, or the editorial sanc- 
tum of an unsuccessful newspaper ; or his patients have not 
sufficiently appreciated his physic ; or he has failed in get- 
ting a patent right for his wonderful perpetual motion ; or 
possibly he has enlarged his practical knowledge of science 
in the laboratory of "some college, or has had his head 
turned by being asked to hear the mathematical recitations 
during the sickness of some professor. But to hear of men 
like Galileo, Kepler, Boyle, Newton, and Leibnitz, or Lyell, 
Mantell, Herschel, Agassiz, Hitchcock, Faraday, Balbo, 
Nichol, or Rosse, heading an attack upon Christianity, would 
be an unprecedented phenomenon. Such men are profoundly 
impressed with the thorough agreement between the facts 
of nature rightly observed, and the declarations of the Bi- 
ble rightly interpreted. 

It is equally rare to hear of a specialist in any depart- 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



337 



nient of science assume Atheistic ground in that depart- 
ment ; though a few of that class are willing to believe that 
some other department of science, of which they have no 
personal knowledge, favors Infidelity. Even Huxley, with 
all his nonsense about the identical composition of the proto- 
plasm of the mutton chop, and that of the lecturer, denies, 
and disproves, spontaneous generation, and votes in the 
London School Board for the reading of the Bible. The 
leading Infidel writers, such as Comte and Spencer, are not 
distinguished by any personal scientific researches and dis- 
coveries; they are merely collectors and retailers, at second- 
hand, of other men's discoveries. The original scientific 
explorers and discoverers are few and modest. 

Nevertheless, the other class, being both the most numer- 
ous and the most noisy, make up by loquacity for their de- 
ficiency of science, and counterbalance their ignorance by 
their assurance. Such writers, assuming that they have 
outstripped all the philosophers of former days, will tell 
you how foolishly David, and Kepler, and Bacon, and New- 
tan, and Herschel dreamed of the heavens declaring the 
glory of the Lord, and the firmament showing his handi- 
work ; " while at the present time, and for minds properly 
familiarized with true astronomical philosophy, the heavens 
display no other powers than those of natural laws, and no 
other glory than that of Hipparchus, of Kepler, of New- 
ton, and of all who have helped to discover them." The- 
ology belongs only to the infancy of the human intellect; 
metaphysical philosophy is the amusement of youth; but 
the full -grown man has learned to relinquish both religion 
and reason, and comes to the " positive state of science in 
which the human mind, acknowledging the impossibility of 
obtaining absolute knowledge, abandons the search after the 
origin and destination of the universe, and the knowledge 
of the secret causes of phenomena." The crown of modern 
science is ultimately to be placed upon the brow of Athe- 
22 



338 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STABS. 



ism ; but long before that eagerly desired achievement, the 
old Bible theology is to be buried beyond the possibility of 
a resurrection, under. mountains of natural laws, and monu- 
ments of scientific discovery. These assertions, confidently 
made, and perseveringly reiterated in the ears of ungodly 
men ignorant of the facts, of impetuous youths eager to 
throw off the restraints of religion, of Christians weak in 
the faith, and even poured into the unsuspecting mind of 
childhood, produce the most painful results ; and it becomes 
the imperative duty of the bishops of the Church of Christ 
not to allow them to pass unchallenged, but to convince the 
gainsayers, and stop the mouths of these unruly and vain 
talkers ; or, if that be not possible, to make their folly man- 
ifest to all men. The implements for such a service are 
well tried and abundant, and the difficulty lies only in mak- 
ing a proper selection. 

At first view, the extinction of religion by science seems very 
unlikely. It is as unlikely that anything that an Infidel says 
about religion should be true, as that a blind man should 
describe the sun correctly, or even read a chapter accurately, 
with the book open before him ? I shall show you presently 
that learned Infidels make the grossest blunders respecting 
the plainest Scripture records of scientific facts. It is very 
unlikely that Infidels, who lay no claim to prophetic in- 
spiration, should make any predictions about religion more 
reliable than those they have been telling so abundantly for 
two hundred years past, respecting the immediate over- 
throw of Christianity and the Bible ; which, nevertheless, 
has been going on conquering new kingdoms every year, its 
missionaries outstripping scientific ardor in exploring the 
mysteries of African geography, honorably receiving the 
prizes which the Infidel Volney instituted for philological 
proficiency, and printing Bibles from Voltaire's printing- 
press. And it is very unlikely that these physical sciences, 
so long worshipers in the temple of Grod, should now become 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



339 



impious ; as unlikely as that Hitchcock, or McCosh, or 
Hodge, or Barnes should now, in their old days, renounce 
the Bible, and blaspheme God. What ! astronomy, and 
zoology, and botany, and ethnography, that were suckled at 
the breast of the Bible, raise their hands against the mother 
that bore thorn ! Incredible ! These sciences made an early 
profession of religion ; taught Sabbath-school in the days 
of Job, Zophar, and Elihu ; wrote sacred poetry, and were 
licensed to preach, in the days of Solomon ; poured forth 
prophetic raptures in the days of Uzziah, Jothain, Ahaz, 
and Hezekiah ; wrote volumes on the politics of Christianity 
in Babylon, and painted glorious visions of the victories of 
the Lamb of God, and dazzling views of the landscapes of 
paradise restored, in Patmos ; employed the gigantic intel- 
lect of Newton, the elegant pen of Paley, the eloquence of 
Chalmers, Ilcrschel's heaven-piercing eye, and Miller's mus- 
cular arm, to guard the outer courts of the sanctuary, while 
they sung sublime anthems to the music of David's harp 
within. Have they now, after such a life of devotion, re- 
linquished all these sublimities and beatitudes, taken lodg- 
ings in the sty, and renounced their faith in God, and 
hope of heaven, for the Infidel maxim, "Let us eat and 
drink, for to-morrow we die? " God forbid ! On the con- 
trary, all matured science glorifies its Creator. 

As a specimen of the testimony of matured science to 
religion, let us look at the progress of astronomy, as it has 
successively swept away one Atheistic theory after another, 
answered anti-Bible objections, and illustrated promises 
couched in heavenly figures, long incomprehensible to the 
Church. If, in order to present something like a fair out- 
line of the bearings of astronomy on modern Atheism, we 
should have occasion to repeat, expand, and illustrate some 
things already introduced in previous chapters, the repeti- 
tion won't hurt us. A good story is nothing the worse for 
being twice told ; and the story of our opponents is nothing 



340 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



but a ceaseless repetition of the Atheism of twenty centu- 
ries. 

The progress of astronomical science has swept away the 
alleged facts on which all systems of Atheism have been 
based. 

1. It has refuted the fundamental dogma of Atheism, that 
the universe is infinite, and therefore self- existent. 

The assertion is confidently made by Atheists and Pan- 
theists, that the universe has no boundaries; not merely 
none which we can see, but that it actually fills all immens- 
ity ; suns succeeding suns, and firmament clustering beyond 
firmament, throughout infinite space. 

It is indispensable for the Atheist not only to assert, but 
to prove this to be the fact, if he would convince himself, 
or any other person, that the universe had no Creator, but 
exists by the necessity of its own nature ; for that which 
exists by the necessity of its own nature must exist in all 
time, and in every place. No reason can be given why self- 
existent suns, planets, and moons should exist in any one 
portion of space, and not exist in any other similar portion 
of space. For if such a reason could be given, that reason 
must show a cause for their existence in the one place, and 
their non-existence in another ; and that cause must have 
existed before the universe, and must have been a cause 
sufficient to produce the effect. This sufficient cause in- 
cludes ability to produce, wisdom to arrange, and force to 
put in motion all the powers of the universe ; qualities 
which reside only in an intelligent being. This,, is the 
cause which the Bible asserts when it says, " In the begin- 
ning God created the heavens and the earth," and which 
Atheists deny when they assert that " the universe is eter- 
nal and infinite." 

Now, this fundamental article of the creed of Infidels is 
utterly incapable of proof. If the fact were really so, they 
never could prove it. They acknowledge no revelation from 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



341 



an infinite understanding, but fouud their belief on the 
knowledge of a number of finite and ignorant beings. Be- 
fore they are competent to pronounce upon the extent of the 
universe, they must explore it thoroughly; which, when 
•they shall have done, they will have demonstrated that it 
jhas boundaries, seeing they have discovered them; but, if 
they have not thoroughly explored the universe, they can 
not say that it is infinite, because they do not know. The 
very utmost, then, which could possibly be asserted on the 
matter would be, not that the universe has no boundaries, 
but that man has never reached them. As in the case of 
ocean soundings, if we can not find bottom, we are not 
therefore to conclude that there is none, but that our line 
is not long enough, or our lead not heavy enough to reach it. 

It were a logical absurdity to say, that the whole is 
greater than the sum of its parts — that any number of finite 
parts could compose an infinite universe. Each sun or 
planet is a finite object, and any possible number of them 
can be counted in a sufficient time. It is impossible that 
any number can be infinite ; for we are not using the word 
infinite here in the loose sense in which it is used by math- 
ematicians, when they speak of an infinite series; that is, a 
series which, though it has no end, has a beginning; but in 
the strict sense of something having neither beginning nor 
end. A beginning of the universe, either in space or time, 
is the very thing the Atheist denies. 

The same objection applies to the allegation, that infinite 
space is full of ether, air, gas, nebula?, or any other kind of 
matter. It is an assertion incapable of proof ; and there- 
fore thoroughly unscientific; as all Infidel theories are. 
But if it could be proven that every part of space accessi- 
ble to our telescopes is full of an ether whose undulations 
transmit light, as we believe it can, that would be only a 
proof of the finitude of matter. That ether consists of 
parts whose movements can be measured and numbered; and 



342 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



no possible multitude of such parts can amount to the 
infinite. 

While reason thus enables us to show this dogma of the 
infinity of the universe to be theoretically improbable, and 
logically irrational, science has lately taken a more decisive 
step, and demonstrated it to be actually false. The universe 
has boundaries, and we have seen them. The proof is sim- 
ple, and easily demonstrable. That broad band of lumin- 
ous cloud which stretches across the heaven, called the 
Milky Way, consists of millions of stars, so small and dis- 
tant that we can not see the individual stars, and so numer- 
ous that we can not help seeing the light of the mass; just 
as you see the outline of the forest at -a distance, but are 
unable to distinguish the individual trees. Besides this 
mass of stars to which our solar system belongs, there are 
thousands of smaller similar clouds in various parts of the 
heavens, which have successively been shown to consist of 
multitudes of stars. But all around these star-clouds the 
clear blue sky is discovered by the naked eye. 

Now, it is easy to perceive, that if all the regions of infi- 
nite space were filled either with self-luminous suns, or 
planets capable of reflecting light, or luminous nebulae, or 
comets of gaseous consistency, at such distances as the 
Milky Way, or any other star-cloud demonstrates to be safe 
and practicable, we should see no blue sky at all ; but the 
whole vault of heaven would present that whitish light re- 
sulting from the mingling of the rays of multitudes of 
stars, planets, and comets, which the Milky Way does act- 
ually exhibit. No matter how small or how distant these 
stars, if they were only infinitely numerous, it is impossible 
that there could be any point in the heavens unilluminated 
by their rays, even although the stars themselves were in- 
visible to our eyes, or even to our telescopes. The whole 
heaven would be one vast Milky Way. Or rather, as Hum- 
boldt reasons, "If the entire vault of heaven were covered 



INFIDELITY AMONG TIIE STARS. 



343 



with innumerable strata of stars, one behind the other, as 
with a widespread starry canopy, and light were undimin- 
ished in its passage through space, the sun would be distin- 
guished only by its spots, the moon would appear as a dark 
dis^, and amid the general blaze not a constellation would 
be visible."* It would appear also to follow, as a necessary 
consequence, that such an infinite multitude of blazing suns 
must generate a heat compared with which the general con- 
flagration would b^cool and comfortable. 

But the telescope shows us a state of matters vastly dif- 
ferent from this. It shows us, in fact, that space, so far 
from being occupied with suns and stars, is mostly empty. 
Our universe is only a little island in the great ocean of in- 
finite space. 

Though the telescope discovers multitudes of stars where 
the naked eye sees none, yet they are, in far the greater 
number of instances, "seen projected on a perfectly dark 
heaven, without any appearance of intermixed nebulosity. 
And even through the Milky Way, and the other nebulas, 
the telescope penetrates, through '•'• intervals absolutely dark, 
and completely void of any star, of the smallest telescopic 
magnitude ."J It may assist us to understand the full im- 
port of this declaration, to remember that Lord Rosse's 
large telescope clearly defines any object on the moon's sur- 
face as large as the Custom House. Its power of penetrat- 
ing space surpasses our power of imagination, but is repre- 
sented by saying, that light, which flashes from San Fran- 
cisco to London quicker than you can close your eye and 
open it again, requires millions of years to travel to our 
earth from the most distant star- cloud discoverable by this 
telescope.^ If a galaxy like this of ours existed anywhere 

* Cosmos III. 138. 

t Hersehers Outlines, chap. xvii. sec. 887. 
% Cosmos III. 197. 

2 Nichols Architecture of the Heavens, 9th ed. p. 180. 



344 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



within this amazing distance, that telescope would discover 
its existence. It has, in fact, augmented the universe visi- 
ble to us, 125,000,000 times, and thus made us feel that 
not merely this world, which constitutes our earthly all, and 
yon glorious sun, which shines upon it, but all the host of 
heaven's suns, and planets, and moons, and firmaments, 
which our unaided eyes behold, are but as a handful of the 
sand of the ocean shore compared with the immensity of 
the universe. But ever, and along with this, it has shown 
us the ocean as well as the shore, and revealed boundless 
regions of darkness and solitude stretching around and far 
away beyond these islands of existence. The telescope, 
then, enlarges and confirms our views of the extent of the 
unoccupied portions of space. 

If there were only one dark point of the heavens no 
larger than the apparent magnitude of the smallest star, 
this one unoccupied space would sufficiently disprove the 
infinity of the universe, inasmuch as there would be a por- 
tion of space of boundless length, and of a diameter not 
less than the diameter of the earth's orbit, say 190,000,000 
miles, in which stars might exist, as they do in its borders, 
but yet do not. But the argument becomes utterly over- 
whelming, when the attempt is made to calculate the pro- 
portion of space occupied by the stars to that left unoccu- 
pied. Whether we take Herschel's computation, that the 
nebulse cover one two hundred and seventieth part of the 
superficies of the visible heaven,* or Struve's supposition 
of the existence of a star subtending no measurable angle, 
in every part of the visible sky as large as the surface of 
the moon, the vast disproportion of the universe, to the 
space in which it is placed, forces itself upon our notice. 
For, upon the largest of these computations, the propor- 
tion of existence to empty space is mathematically proved 



* Cosmos IV. 292. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



345 



to be not greater than as the cube of one to the cube of 
two hundred and sixty-nine; that is to say, there is room 
for 19,395,109 such universes as this of ours in that small 
part of infinite space open to the view of Herschel's tele- 
scopes. But when we come to consider the vastness of these 
regions of darkness, over which no light has traveled for 
twenty millions of years, and remember also that astronomers 
have looked clear through the nebulae, and find that they bear 
no more cubical proportion to the infinite darkness behind 
them than the sparks of a chimney do to the extent of the 
sky against which they seem projected, so far from imagin- 
ing the universe to be infinite, we stand confounded at its 
relative insignificance, and are convinced that it bears no 
more proportion to infinite space than a fishing-boat does 
to the Atlantic Ocean. 

There is no possible evasion of this great fact, by any 
contradictory hypothesis. It can not be objected "that 
stars may exist at infinite distances, whose light has not yet 
reached the limits of our universe." If they do, they did 
not exist from eternity, for there is no possible distance over 
which light could not have traveled, during eternal dura- 
tion. But their eternal existence is the very thing which 
the Atheist is concerned to prove. Grant that infinite 
space is filled with worlds which had a beginning, and their 
necessary existence instantly falls, and we are compelled to 
seek for a cause of their beginning of existence ; that is to 
say, a Creator. 

Nor will it answer the purpose to say, " that for anything 
we know to the contrary, these dark regions may be filled 
with dark stars." 

If the fact were so, it is equally fatal to the dogma of 
self-existence. Some stars shine; others are dark. Why 
so? Wherefore this difference? Variety is an effect, and 
demands a prior cause. Were there only two stars in the 
sky, or two substances on the earth, and those unlike in any 



346 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



particular, that plurality, and that variety, would prove 
that they could not be infinite or self-existent, but depend- 
ent upon some cause for their existence, and for their vari- 
ety of form. 

But we do know many things contrary to the notion that 
the dark regions of infinite space may be full of dark stars. 
Light is not the only indication of the presence of a star. 
The attraction of gravity, which is wholly independent of 
light, is a proof quite as certain and satisfactory to the as- 
tronomer. The presence of stars and planets too faint to 
be discovered by the naked eye, and of one, the planet Nep- 
tune,* as far distant from the planet disturbed by its attrac- 
tion as the earth is from the sun, was ascertained, and its 
place pointed out by Adams and Leverrier, before it was 
seen. If the dark interplanetary spaces, then, were full of 
dark attracting bodies, the perturbations of the other plan- 
ets would discover their existence. So the presence of some 
iuvisible stars at much greater distances from their visible 
associates has been discovered by Bessel,y and it is quite 
possible that a dark firmament may yet be discovered, con- 
taining as great a number of dark stars as we now behold of 
luminaries ; another group of islets in the ocean of infinite 
space. But the very facts which will prove their existence 
will disprove their infinity ; for we can know their presence 
only by their perturbation of the proper motions of the vis- 
ible stars; but if infinite space were full of dark bodies, 
the fisible stars would have no room to move at all. It is 
easily demonstrable, that if infinite space were filled with 
dark stars, the equilibrium and coherence of our galaxy, 
and of all other clusters of stars, would be destroyed. The 
existence of nebulse, and clusters, and the revolutions of the 
binary stars, are conclusive proof that the dark parts of in- 
finite space are not full of dark attracting bodies. 

* Nicholl's Contemplations on the Solar System, xxx. 
t Cosmos III. 253. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



347 



Nor can the Atheist here raise his usual argument from 
unknown facts, and say that, "far beyond the range of our 
most powerful telescopes, a boundless expanse of firmaments 
may exist." It concerns not our present argument whether 
such exist or not. Whatsoever discoveries may be made to 
eternity, of firmaments, ten thousand times ten thousand 
times larger than we now behold, they can never bear the 
smallest proportion to the infinite space in which they exist. 
Beyond these islets will extend gulfs and oceans immeasur- 
able. Our argument, however, has no concern with the 
unknown possible, but with the actual fact — visible to the 
naked eye and confirmed by the telescope — that there is a 
portion of space in which millions of universes such as this 
might exist with safety, yet they do not. Worlds, there- 
fore, do not exist by the necessity of their own nature, 
wherever there is room for them, but must have had some 
pre-existent, external, and supernatural cause of their exist- 
ence in this place and not in other places. This implies 
choice — will — God. 

The physical refutation of the self-existence of the uni- 
verse is completed by the discovery, that all the oris of 
heaven, as well as the earth, are in motion, and that a,n or- 
derly and regulated motion* The fact need not be illus- 
trated, for it is not denied. The consequence is inevitable. 
That which is self existent must be unchangeable; for 
change is an effect, and demands a cause; and the cause 
must exist before the effect, and produce it. Whatsoever is 
changeable, then, is a product of a prior cause, and so not 
self-existent. But every part of the universe is changeable, 
for it is in motion, which is a change of place; and, there- 
fore, is not self-existent, but the product of a prior cause. 

Professor Fick, who was some time since called from 
Zurich to fill the professorship of physiology at Wurzburg, 



* Herschel's Outlines of Astronomy, chap. xvi. 



348 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



and who is known by his experiments on muscular physics, 
in a recent work on the transformation of force, brings out 
the argument in proof of the non-eternity of our universe 
in a new form. He shows that heat is continually being 
lost by radiation ; and when mechanical force is converted 
into heat some of that heat can never be brought back to 
be mechanical force. And as this change from mechanical 
force to heat is ever going on, all force must at last turn into 
heat, in which case all difference of temperature would be 
lost and universal stagnation and death would be the result. 
He then concludes in the following words, which we quote 
from Nature, Macmillan's weekly: "We are come to this 
alternative; either in our highest, or most general, our most 
fundamental scientific abstractions some great point has 
been overlooked; or the universe will have an end, and 
must have had a beginning; could not have existed from 
eternity, but must at some date, not infinitely distant, have 
arisen from something not forming part of the chain of nat- 
ural causes, i. e., must have been created."* 

To this it has been replied, that motion is the normal 
condition of matter ; arising from the force of gravitation? 
acting in and upon the various bodies composing the uni- 
verse; and mathematical calculations have been attempted 
to show how vortices, and spiral motions, could be produced 
by the force of gravitation, and the mutual resistances of 
the atoms originally composing the universe 

But this attempt is easily seen to be a failure. The at- 
traction of gravitation alone can not possibly produce any 
such motion as we behold in the heavens; nor can it orig- 
inate, nor sustain, any kind of eternal motion whatever. 
For the attraction of gravitation is always in right lines; 
but there is no rectilinear motion in the heavens; all celes- 
tial motions are curvilinear. Nor can the attraction of 



* Nevj York Evangelist, May 5, 1870. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



349 



gravitation account for the maintenance of any kind of 
eternal motion. Its tendency is to draw all bodies to the 
center of gravity, and to keep them there, in one vast heap, 
by the force of their mutual attraction; thus bringing all 
motion to an eternal rest. 

To this it is now replied that motion is the equivalent of 
light, heat, electricity, and chemical reaction; all of which 
are convertible into motion. These are properties of mat- 
ter, and inseparable from it, and so as eternal as itself. 

We have already disproved the eternity of matter; but 
if, for the sake of argument, it were granted, yet would not 
the regulated and orderly motions of the universe be thereby 
accounted for. For these forces either exactly balance the 
force of gravitation, or they do not. If they do not, and 
their repulsion prevails, by even the slightest degree, the 
particles of matter had been driven away into infinite space 
millions of years ago, and suns, and planets, and atheistic 
philosophers, would have vanished like the baseless fabric 
of a vision. But if the attraction of gravitation had pre- 
vailed, by even the weight of an ounce, long ages ago sun, 
moon and stars would have rushed together into one vast 
mountain mass, whose attraction would have been so great, 
that no living creature could move upon its surface, and 
whose parts would be compressed into a density compared 
with which quicksilver would be lighter than cork. 

But if, on the other hand, it be alleged, that these inher- 
ent forces of matter exactly balance its power of gravita- 
tion — with which they have no other apparent relation — 
then the argument is irresistible, that these grains of sand 
and drops of water and globes of granite being unequal to 
such calculations, there was some calculating engineer at 
work arranging the motions of the stars. 

No mechanical law is a sufficient cause for this motion. 
To allege that a power of orderly, regulated motion — and 
there is no other sort of motion in heaven or earth — is an 



350 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



inherent property of matter, is simply to insult our com- 
mon sense, and overturn the foundation of all reason. For 
we have no knowledge of matter, and can have none, more 
certain than we have of the constitution of our own minds, 
which requires us to trace up every change among material 
objects to the energy and will of a person capable of plan- 
ning and effecting the change. To refer us to the law of 
gravity is not to gi^e us a cause for the motions of the 
heavenly bodies, but only a name; for law is only a rule of 
action. We demand a lawgiver — an agent — a force, capa- 
ble of producing effects. When the law of projectiles 
makes a cannon-ball, and projects it, we will believe that 
the law of gravity made the worlds, and moves them. 

'•'Descending within the mind's interior chambers, I find 
no conviction so sure of the existence of an external world, 
as is my belief in the reality of power — of something that 
sustains succession, and causes order. Again, then, whence 
this idea, and what is it? What this attribute with which 
I endow material laws, and raise them into forces? Now, 
in my apprehension, the strictest scrutiny can not obtain 
for these inquiries any reply save one ; we primarily con- 
nect the idea of power with no change or movement, except 
an act or determination of the Free Will; but from such 
acts, that idea is inseparable. If, therefore, in order to ex- 
plain the progress of material things, we require the agency 
of efficient causes, is not this a direct and solemn recognition 
— through all form and transiency — of the necessity of an 
' ever-present creative power; a power requisite and necessary 
to uphold — to renew the universe every moment — or, rather, 
to prolong creation by the persistence of the creative act? 
And, in very truth, startling though it be, such is the only 
and ultimate scientific idea of the divine omnipresence. 
Law is not even the Almighty's minister; the order of the 
material world, however close and firm, is not merely the 
Almighty's ordinance. The forces, if so we name them, 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



351 



which express that order, are not powers which he has 
evolved from the silences, and to whose guardianship he has 
committed all things, so that he himself might repose. No ! 
above, below, around, there is God; there his universal 
presence, speaking to finite creatures, in finite forms, a lan- 
guage which only the living heart can understand. In the 
rain and sunshine; in the soft zephyrs; in the cloud, the 
torrent, and the thunder; in the bursting blossom, and the 
fading branch ; in the revolving season, and the rolling 
star; there is the infinite essence, and the mystic develop- 
ment of HIS WILL."* 

2. Scientific astronomy inexorably demolishes the Atheistic 
scheme for the arrangement of the solar system by accident, 
commonly known as Buff oris cosmogony. 

" Buffon supposed that the force of a comet falling 
obliquely on the sun has projected to a distance a torrent 
of the matter of which it is composed, as a stone thrown 
into a basin causes the water which it contains to splash 
out. This torrent of matter, in a state of fusion, has 
broken into several parts, which have been arrested at dif- 
ferent distances from the sun, according to their density, or 
the impetus they received. They then united in spheres, 
by the effect of the motion of rotation, and condensing by 
cold, have become opaque and solid planets and satellites. "f 

This formation of worlds by accident, it is true, gave no 
reason for the form of their orbits, for their rotation on their 
axes, in one direction, and that, too, the direction of their 
motion, nor for several other matters, of which Infidels make 
little account, but about which plain men like to ask, 
namely: "Where did the sun come from? What melted it 
down into a fluid state, fit to be splashed about? Where 
did the comet come from? And who threw it with so cor. 

* Nichol's Architecture of the Heavens. 9th edition, 272. 
t Pontoeoulant in System of the V/orld, p. 70. 



352 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



rect an aim through infinite space as exactly to hit the sun 
in an oblique direction. Creation, it seems, was nearly 
missed, after all. - This chaotic theory never gained mnch 
respect from men of science, though its simplicity speedily 
opened its way among the vulgar, and it has ever been a 
a favorite with the most ignorant class of Infidels, number- 
ing thousands of warm advocates, even at the present day. 

It was thought to be very much corroborated by the dis- 
covery of the asteroids, and their supposed formation by 
the explosion of a larger body. There is a certain propor- 
tion observed in the distances of the orbits of the planets 
from each other — a breadth or gauge, as it were, on the 
celestial railroad. But there was the breadth of a track 
between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter on which no train 
ran, and this vacancy excited the curiosity of astronomers. 
In the first seven years of this century, three very small 
planets were discovered, running near this track; and Dr. 
Gibers, the discoverer of Pallas, finding that they were 
nearly in the same track, and sometimes crossed each other, 
and that they were diminutively small — bearing about the 
same proportion to a regular planet which a hand-car does 
to a freight train — imagined that they were formed by the 
explosion of a large planet; that the boiler of the large 
locomotive had burst, the fragments had all lighted upon 
the track again, in the shape of hand-cars, and the hand- 
cars had magnanimously resolved to keep running, and do 
the business of the line ; and that, as there must have been 
material enough in the original planet to make some thou- 
sands of them, more would be discovered ~by watching two 
depots, at the crossings of the tracks, in the constellations 
Virgo and the Whale, where they must all pass. In fact, 
he did himself find another, very near one of these nodes ; 
more recently many others have been found; and astrono- 
mers now expect to hear of one or two more every year. 

At first sight his theory seemed strengthened by every new 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



353 • 



discovery. It is true, reflecting men could not help won- 
dering at such a marvelously regular explosion as would 
produce beautiful little orderly planets, going so regularly 
too, and all by accident. They never heard of the blowing 
up of a palace producing cottages, or the explosion of a 
steamboat throwing off the hurricane deck in the shape of 
whaleboats, or the bursting of a locomotive producing model 
engines, or even hand-cars. However, as the theory re- 
moved God out of sight, it was generally accepted and freely 
used by Infidels, to show that the world had no need of a 
Creator. 

But astronomers saw, that as each new asteroid had a 
track of its own, and ran to a different terminus, and the 
roads in which they ran were of different gauges and grades 
— one little asteroid, Pallas, running up and down a track 
inclined thirty-five degrees, just as speedily as the others — 
every new discovery increased the difficulty of accounting 
for their origin by explosion. But the discovery of the 
planet Hygeia, at a vast distance from the others, utterly 
overturned the explosion theory. Loomis says : 

"The difficulties in the way of our regarding these small 
planets, as fragments of a single body, were well nigh-in- 
superable before the discovery of Hygeia. This last dis- 
covery has probably given the death-blow to the theory of 
Gibers. The orbit of Hygeia completely incloses the orbits 
of several of the asteroids, its perihelion distance — that is, 
its least distance from the sun — exceeding the aphelion — or 
greatest distance — of Flora by twenty-jive millions of miles. 
No change of position of the orbits could, therefore, bring 
these orbits to a coincidence."* 

The matter has been finally settled by the greatest of 
modern mathematicians, Leverrier, who has subjected the 
eccentricities, distances, and inclinations of the orbits of 



* Progress of Astronomy, 70. 
23 



354 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



the asteroids to a mathematical investigation, the result of 
which is as follows : 

"In the present state of things, these eccentricities and 
these inclinations are totally incompatible with Olbers' hypo- 
thesis, which supposed that the small planets — some of 
which were discovered even in his day — were produced from 
the wreck of a larger star, which had exploded. The forces 
necessary to launch the fragments of a given body in such 
different routes (whose existence we should be obliged to 
suppose) would be of such an improbable intensity, that 
the most limited mathematical knowledge could not but see 
its absurdity." He concludes the memoir by advancing 
four propositions, "which forever annihilate Olbers' hypo- 
thesis."* 

3. The progress of astronomical discovery has utterly re- 
futed the notion of creation by natural law, known as the 
Development Theory, or the Nebular Hypothesis. 

Scientific Infidels knew that there was too much order 
and regularity in the motions of the planets to allow any 
rational mind to ascribe these motions to accident, accord- 
ing to Buffon's notion. They saw that these movements 
must be regulated by law. La Place, an eminent mathe- 
matician, saw that there are at least five great regularities 
pervading the system, for which Buffon's theory gave no 
reason : 

1. The planets all move in elliptical orbits, nearly circu- 
lar. They might, on the contrary, have been as elongated 
as those of comets. 

2. They revolve in orbits nearly in the plane of the sun's 
equator. They might have revolved in orbits inclined to it 
at any angle, or even in the plane of his poles. 

3. They revolve around the sun all in the same direction, 
which is the direction of his rotation on his axis. 

* Memoirs of the French Academy, by M, Leverrier ; from The 
Annual of Scientific Discovery, for 1855, p. 376. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 355 



4. They rotate on their axes, also, so far as known, in the 
same direction. 

5. The satellites (with the exception of those of Uranus) 
revolve around their primary planets, and also rotate on 
their axes, in the same normal direction. 

It was evident, even to the believers in chance, that so 
many regularities were not produced by accident. La Place 
found, by computing the chances by the formula of proba- 
bilities, that the chances were two millions to one against 
these regularities happening by chance, and four millions 
to one in furor of these motions having a common origin. 
The grand phenomenon being a motion of rotation in the 
whole system, of which the rotation of the sun is the cen- 
tral part, he thought if he could account for this, he could 
explain all the rest. 

He set out by supposing, that the sun and planets orig- 
inally existed as a vast cloud of gaseous matter, intensely 
heated — a vast fire-mist — placed in a region of space much 
cooler, and that this cloud, by gradual cooling, and the pres- 
sure of its parts, settled down into solid forms. It was sup- 
posed that some portions of this cloud would begin to cool 
sooner than others, and so become solid sooner, and that the 
hot gas, rushing to the solid part, would form a vortex, 
which would set the cloud in motion around its center. As 
the speed of its rotation would increase, and the outside 
condense and grow solid before the inside, the cloud would 
whirl off the rings of solid matter, which would keep re- 
volving in the same orbits in which they were cast off, and 
would revolve faster and faster as they grew cooler and more 
solid, till they broke up, by the force of their velocity, into 
smaller pieces ; which fragments, in their turn, repeated the 
process, until the present number of planets and their sat- 
ellites was produced.* 

* Horschel's Outlines of Astronomy, p. 558, ed. of 1853. 



356 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



This theory differs from Buffon's much as a low pressure 
engine, deriving most of its power from the condenser, dif- 
fers from one of high pressure. La Place does not explode 
the boiler to make his planets, but merely runs his train so 
fast as to break an axle every now and then, when the wheel 
runs off with the velocity it has got, and keeps its track as 
well as if it had an engineer to guide it, grows into a little 
locomotive by dint of running, and after a while breaks an 
axle too — breaking is a hereditary failing of these suns and 
planets that had no Grod to make them — and the wheels thus 
thrown off supply it with moons and rings, like Saturn's. 
The illustration is not nearly so absurd as the theory, inas- 
much as a locomotive is an incomparably less complicated 
contrivance than a planet. However the nonsense was 
cradled in the halls of philosophy by means of antiquity, 
and distance. 

As no fiction was too marvelous for the credence of the 
Greek, if it were only a hundred years old, or located be- 
yond the Euxine, so to our development philosopher any 
impossibility may be accepted, if it can only be dissolved 
into gas, and located a good many millions of miles away; 
and to make it an article of faith on which he will risk his 
soul, it is only necessary to give it a remote antiquity. No 
Papist ever insisted more on antiquity as the solvent of all 
absurdity. Antiquity, distance, and expansion are his trin- 
ity, with which all absurdities become scientific facts. 

Herschel had discovered numbers of nebulse, or luminous 
clouds, in the distant heavens, shining with a distinct light, 
but which, with the highest magnifying power he could ap- 
ply, presented no trace of stars. Some nebulae, it is true, 
his largest telescope resolved, like our own Milky Way, into 
beds of distinct stars; but there were others — for instance, 
one in the belt of Orion — visible to the naked eye as a cloud, 
but which his forty feet telescope only displayed as a larger 
cloud, without any shape of stars. Now, reasoning upon 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



357 



the matter, lie found that if these nebulae were composed 
of stars as large as those distinctly visible, they must be 
immensely distant to be indistinguishable by his telescope, 
and exceedingly numerous and close together to give a cloud 
of light visible to the naked eye. In fact, the suns of those 
firmaments must be so close to each other as to present a 
blaze of glory, and complexities of revolution inconceivable 
to the dwellers on earth. But as this daring idea seemed 
incredible, even to his giant mind, he thought the appear- 
ance of these nebulae might be more rationally accounted 
for by supposing that they were not stars at all, but simply 
clouds of gaseous matter, like the matter of comets, from 
which he supposed that stars were formed by a long process 
of condensation and solidification. He thought this theory 
was favored by the fact, that nebulae are generally seen in 
those portions of the heavens that are not thickly strewn 
with stars; and also by the various forms of these clouds. 
Some were merely loose clouds, without any definite form ; 
others seemed gathering toward the center. In some, of a 
roundish, or oval form, the central mass seemed well defined. 
In a few, the process seemed nearly complete, a bright star 
shining in the midst of a faint nebulous halo. Here, then, 
it was said, we see the whole progress of the growth of stars; 
their development from the gaseous nebulous fluid into solid, 
brilliant suns. La Place accepted Herschel's discoveries as 
conclusive proof of the truth of his theory, and it was gen- 
erally accepted by the scientific world. Oddly enough, In- 
fidels seem not to have noticed that those appearances of 
condensation {award the center, which seemed to Herschel so 
strongly in favor of his theory of the nebulous fluid, were 
diametrically opposed to La Place's requirements of conden- 
sation at the circumference; and these two contradictory 
notions were supposed to support each other, and to furnish 
a solid basis for the development hypothesis. 

This theory, as stated by Herschel, and expounded by 



358 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



Nicholl, Dick, and other Christian writers, is not necessarily 
Atheistical. On the contrary, they allege that it furnishes 
us with greater evidences of the power of Grod, and gives 
us higher ideas of his wisdom, to suppose a system of crea- 
tion by development, under natural law, than by a direct 
exercise of his will. Undoubtedly, had Grod so pleased he , 
could have 'made suns from fire-mists, according to some I 
plan which his infinite wisdom could devise, and his om- ■ 
nipotent power could execute ; but it is beyond the possi- 
bilities even of omniscience and omnipotence to make worlds, 
or to make anything but nonsense, according to La Place's 
plan. Had God so pleased, to make firmaments grow as 
forests do, and if he should please to enable us to discover 
such celestial growth in some distant part of heaven, we 
should have the same kind of evidence of his being, power, 
wisdom, and goodness in this creation by natural law which 
we now have from his providence by natural law, in the 
growth of the fruits of the earth, and as much greater an 
amount of it as the heavens are greater than the earth. The 
first beginning of primeval elements demands a Creator. 
The contrivance of the law of development proclaims a Con- 
triver. The force by which it operates — whether that of 
gravity or chemical reaction — must be the force of an Agent. 

The development theory, then, fails to account for the 
origin of the universe, or even of our own world Herbert 
Spencer, its most eloquent expounder, admits this. | He 
says : " It remains only to point out that while the genesis 
of the solar system, and of countless other systems like it,'; 
is thus rendered comprehensible, the ultimate mystery con- 
tinues as great as ever. The problem of existence is not 
solved; it is simply removed farther back. The Nebular 
Hypothesis throws no light on the origin of diffused mat- 
ter; and diffused matter as much needs accounting for as 
concrete matter. The genesis of an atom is not easier to 
conceive than the genesis of a planet. Nay, indeed, so far 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



359 



from making the universe a less mystery than before, it 
makes it a greater mystery. Creation by manufacture is 
a much lower thing than creation by evolution. A man can 
put together a machine, but he can not make a machine de- 
velop itself The ingenious artisan, able as some have 
been, so far to imitate vitality as to produce a mechanical 
piano-forte player, may in some sort conceive how, by greater 
skill, a complete man might be artificially produced; but he 
is unable to conceive how such a complex organism gradu- 
ally arises out of a minute, structureless germ. That our 
harmonious universe once existed potentially as formless, 
diffused matter, and has slowly grown into its present or- 
ganized state, is a far more astonishing fact than would have 
been its formation after the artificial method vulgarly sup- 
posed. Those who hold it legitimate to argue from phe- 
nomena to noumeua, may rightly contend that the Nebular 
Hypothesis implies a First Cause as much transcending 'the 
mechanical god of Paley,' as this does the fetish of a 
savage."* 

The Nebular Hypothesis, then, can not exist without 
God. However, as it seems to remove him to a great dis- 
tance from this present world, both in space and time, it 
has become popular with Atheists. 

The Nebular Hypothesis, as presented by Atheists, imag- 
ines a state of primeval matter as simple, or homogeneous, of 
which science presents no example, in heaven or on earth. 

This homogeneous condition of matter is the very foun- 
dation of the theory. Spencer reasons at great length, that 
all progress is from the simple to the differentiated. And 
it is indispensable for the Atheists to prove that the prim- 
eval world was composed of matter perfectly simple and 
homogeneous. If they alleged that it was composed of sev- 
eral ingredients, nobody would believe them that this com- 

* Illustrations of Universal Progress, page 298. 



360 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



pound was eternal. There is no conviction of common sense 
stronger than that every compound has been put together 
by some compounder. 

They could not persuade a child that a plum pudding made 
itself, or that a steamship filled with passengers existed so 
from eternity, much less a planet with a much larger crew 
and company. They therefore alleged that the first matter 
of the universe was perfectly homogeneous and simple. 
When common people objected that no such thing was to 
be seen in this world nowadays, since all things here — 
stones, water, air, earth, plants, animals — are compounded 
and built up out of a great variety of matters, they claimed 
that this is the result of the growth of our planet; but that 
the nebulae, which astronomers see far away in the sky, are 
young suns and planets, just beginning to condense, and 
that the gas they consist of is the genuine, simple, homo- 
geneous matter out of which this world, and all worlds, 
originally made themselves. They thought the nebulas were 
so very far away that nobody would ever go there to see 
and come back to contradict them ; and so they were quite 
safe in pointing to them as examples of homogeneous matter. 

Now one does not see, if the nebula had been exactly 
what the development men assert — simple, homogeneous 
matter — how they could ever have made such a composite 
world as this out of it, or indeed how they could make any- 
thing but itself out of it. No chemical actions or reactions 
can begin in a simple substance; there must always be at ; - 
least two simple substances to make a compound. Heating 
or cooling a simple substance will never make it a compound.- 
You may heat water in a boiler and cool it again as often as 
you please, but your heating and cooling will never make 
coffee out of it, unless you put coffee into it. So you may 
heat and cool your simple nebula to all eternity, but you 
will never get coffee out of it, much less coffee and coffee- 
pot, china and company, with the biscuits and butter; all 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



361 



which, and a great deal more, our philosophers contrive to 
churn out of the primeval homogeneous nebula. 

But the progress of science has enabled us to show that 
the nebulae, far from being simple, homogeneous matter, 
are compounded of as many ingredients as the flame of your 
lamp or gas light, which is combined of half a score of dif- 
ferent substances. By the discovery of Spec-trum Analysis 
we are able to analyze the chemical composition of the most 
distant flames, to tell whether they proceed from solids or 
gases in a state of combustion, and what are the gases and 
minerals consumed in them. As space forbids the details of 
this discovery here, I can only state the results, namely : 
that some of the nebulae consist of clouds of small solid 
stars, of which the nebula in Orion is an instance; but 
others consist of flames of gases, in all cases compound, and 
showing, besides the oxygenated flame, the lines which de- 
clare the presence of hydrogen, and of several metals. Thus 
it is proved, that no such eternal, homogeneous nebulae are 
to be found in heaven, and consequently nobody could ever 
make worlds out of a substance which had no existence. 

This theory <>f development was always a mere notion, a 
castle in the air, and never could be anything more. To 
say that it was mere moonshine would be to give it far too 
respectable a standing; for moonshine has a real existence, 
and may be seen and felt. But nobody ever saw or felt a 
homogeneous nebula. Indeed, its inventor never pretended 
that he, or anybody else, ever saw one; or saw it sail- 
ing olf into moons, and planets, and suns, or ever would see 
any su h thing. No scientific man has ever pretended that 
it was an established fact, or anything more than a theory, 
a notion. Young people, who are invited to hazard their 
souls on the strength of this miscalled scientific theory, 
should remember that it is not science, which means some- 
thing a man knows, but merely a theory, which is some no- 
tion which he imagines. 



362 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



It is an unsatisfactory notion. It does not answer the 
purpose of its inventors. As we have already seen, it gives 
us no account of the origin of the homogeneous matter of 
the nebula. It gives no answer to the questions, How did 
it get to be so hot, while all the space around it was so cold? 
Is the fire that heated it burning still, or is it exhausted for 
want of fuel? Were the germs of all the plants and ani- 
mals in it while it was blazing at a white heat? If they 
were, how did they escape being burnt to ashes? If they 
were not, where did they come from ? For there was nothing 
but that nebula then in existence. Did it contain within 
itself all the principles of things, all the forces now found 
in the worlds which grew out of it? If so, how came they 
there? If not, how did attraction, and repulsion, vegetable 
life, animal life, intellect, and free will, work themselves into 
that cloud of homogeneous gas ? 

Professor Tyndall thus exposes the absurdity of the sup- 
position that the nebula contained the elements of mind : 
"For what are the core and essence of this hypothesis? 
Strip it naked and you stand face to face with the notion 
that not alone the more ignoble forms of animalcular or 
animal life, not alone the noble forms of the horse and lion, 
not alone the exquisite and wonderful mechanisms of the 
human body, but the human mind itself — emotion, intellect, 
will, and all these phenomena, were once latent in a fiery 
cloud. Surely the mere statement of such a notion is more 
than a refutation."* 

It ivas only one of several contradictory notions. Thus 
a writer in the Atlantic Monthly, so far from accepting the 
notion that the sun and earth are solidifying and cooling 
clown, as explanatory of the facts revealed by astronomy 
and geology, infers the very contrary from the acknowledged 
facts, namely, that we are coming up to the nebular condi- 

* Fragments of Science and Scientific Thought, p. 163. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



3G3 



tion, rather than developing from it. He writes as follows: 

" The earth is progressing by excessively slow changes 
toward the solar and nebulous condition. Its history is a 
repetition of the solar, and a time must arrive when the 
surface, becoming incandescent, will be obscured only by 
casual dark pits in a brilliant atmosphere, a souvenir of the 
present darkness of the crust; yet during a certain period, 
within lixed limits of gravitating force and heat of mass, 
the human race may continue to exist; progressing, we may 
suppose, in force and fineness of organization. The race 
will perish, perhaps, in the order of nature, by failure or 
insufficient number of offspring, a principal cause of tbe 
extinction of superior races. The earth must become lone 
and voiceless long before the incandescence of tbe crust. 
Science may follow it into the condition of an attendant 
star, and then of an expanding nebula. 

" In the cosmos all movements are cyclical, and recurrent, 
without change, save interchange among forms of motion. 
A universe which is, in its total, the same to-day as yester- 
day, and always, would appear idle and dull if it were not 
the footstool of divine force, upon which the creative will 
maintains a certain equipoise, necessary to the continued 
production of spiritual forms." 

It is an i in practicable notion, contrary to the first prin- 
ciple of mechanics, that action and reaction are equal. 

The grand requirement of the system — power to work the 
engine — can never be raised by La Place's, nor by any other 
mechanical plan. The cooling cloud of fire-mist is simply 
a very big machine, and no machine can generate power to 
work itself. If La Place could have somehow or other got 
power for the motion of rotation outside of his cloud, he 
might have made it revolve, and scatter off great lumps of 
the lightest outside stuffs, as your grindstone scatters off 
drops of water when you turn it rapidty; but, having no such 
power, his theory is a plan to make the grindstone turn itself. 



364 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



It is, therefore, precisely of the same value as any one of the 
hundred of ingenious schemes for creating power by machin- 
ery, of the perpetual motion men, in defiance of the first 
law of mechanics, that action and reaction are equal. 

Moreover, he proposes to raise the power by making the 
gas cool at one part of the surface faster than at another, 
and so to make a vortex around that spot, which would set 
the whole mass to revolving. But no conceivable reason 
can be alleged why the homogeneous mass should begin to 
cool at one place faster than another, or indeed why an 
eternally hot mass should ever begin to cool at all. But, 
letting that pass, to make the required vortex for the rota- 
tion of the whole mass, it should not begin to cool at any 
part of the surface, but at the center, where, as every en- 
gine driver who ever saw a condenser, and every woman 
who ever cooled a dish of mush knows, it could not possibly 
begin to cool till the outside mass had become cold ; and so 
no motion could be produced. This is so well known in the 
machine shops that it is rare to find a machinist own the 
theory. 

But even a more fatal objection has been raised by one of 
the most eloquent expounders of the theory. Mr. Spencer 
shows us that the mass, condensing under the influence of 
gravitation, so far from cooling must necessarily evolve heat. 
He is perfectly clear and decided on this matter, that the 
condensing mass could never, by any possibility, begin to 
cool, but must begin to heat, and go on heating till it burst 
out in a blaze. He says: "Heat must inevitably be gener- 
ated by the aggregation of diffused matter into a concrete 
form ; and throughout our reasonings we have assumed that 
such generation of heat has been an accompaniment of neb- 
ular condensation.' 1 * "While the condensation and the 
rate of rotation are progressively increasing, the approach 
of the atoms necessarily generates a progressively increasing 

* Illustrations of Progress, page 292. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



3G5 



temperature. As this temperature rises light begins to be 
evolved, and ultimately there results a revolving sphere of 
fluid matter radiating intense light and heat — a sun."* 

This, it will be perceived, is exactly the reverse of the 
I original nebular theory of a cooling globe, or spheroid of 
homogeneous nebular matter, diffused by intense heat, and 
cooling down into suns, and moons, and planets. So far as 
the Spencer system is accepted, it displaces La Place's 
theory, and the inventor accordingly works out a new theory 
of his own, and equally inconsistent with known facts and 
principles. But as Mr. Spencer candidly owns that his 
scheme can neither generate matter nor force, as we have 
already seen, it needs no further discussion in this connec- 
tion. 

The fact is simply this, a chemical perpetual motion is as 
impossible as a mechanical one. The discovery of the con- 
vertibility of 1'orces shows this. The development theory 
of the generation of motion by processes of the self-heat- 
ing or the self-cooling of the machine, or by chemical ac- 
tions and reactions, is, in its last analysis, only a big per- 
petual motion humbug. 

Even were the rotation, and the cooling process, to take 
place, as is supposed, no such results would proceed from 
these combined operations as the case requires ; for, accord- 
ing to the theory, as the cooling and contracting rings re- 
volve in the verge of a vortex of fluid less dense than 
themselves, one of these two results must take place: either, 
as is most probable, from their exceeding tenuity, the rings 
will break at once into fragments, when, instead of flying- 
outward, they will sink toward the center, and, as long as 
they are heavier than the surrounding fluid, they will stay 
there; and, as the cooling goes on on the outside, so will the 
concentration of the heavier matter, till we have one great 



'^Illustrations of Progress, page 34. 



366 



INFIDELITY AMONG TKE STARS. 



spheroid, with a solid center, licpid covering, and gaseous 
atmosphere. A vortex will never make, nor allow to exist 
beyond its center, planets heavier than the fluid of which 
it is composed. The other alternative, and the one which 
La Place selected, was the supposition that the cooling and 
contracting rings did not at first break up into pieces, but 
retained their continuity; but, contrary to all experience 
and reason, he supposed that these cooling rings kept con- 
tracting and widening out from the heated mass, at the 
same time. The only fluid planetary rings which we can 
examine — those of Saturn — have been closing in on the 
planet since the days of Huygens, and eventually will be 
united with the body of the planet. Every boy who has 
seen a blacksmith hoop a cart-wheel has learned the princi- 
ple, that a heated ring contracts as it cools, and in doing so 
presses in upon the mass around which it clings. But, ac- 
cording to this nebular notion, the fire-mist keeps cooling 
and shrinking up, while the rings, of the very same heat 
and material, keep cooling faster, and widening out from it; 
a piece of schismatical behavior without a parallel among 
solids or fluids, either in heaven or earth, or under the earth. 

Plateau's illustration of the mode in which centrifugal 
force acts in overcoming molecular attraction, has been cited 
as a demonstration of the truth of the nebular hypothesis. 
The conditions, however, are entirely different. By means 
of clock-work he caused a globule of oil to rotate in a mix- 
ture of alcohol and water of the same density, thus entirely 
getting rid of the power of gravitation ; and by increasing 
the velocity he caused it to flatten out into a disc, and finally 
to project a multitude of minute drops, which continued 
their revolutions so long as the fluid in which they floated 
kept revolving by the motion of the rotating spindle, the 
divergent drops, the central mass, and the surrounding fluid, 
being all the while of the same density But the essential 
conditions of the nebular theory are, that the central mass 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



307 



exert an attraction of gravitation upon all its parts, and 
therefore be denser than the surrounding ether or empty space, 
and that the cooling and contracting rings be of a different 
density from the rest of the mass. Their divergence from 
the more fluid portion is supposed to arise from their grow- 
ing denser. A nd lveclus shows* that the divergent drops owe 
their existence to the expansion, not to the contraction, of 
the globule of oil. This experiment, then, contradicts the 
theory, so far as it is applicable. 

Plateau himself never adduced this experiment in support 
of the nebular theory ; but having, by way of illustration, 
spoken of the revolving drops as satellites, and finding that 
expression misunderstood, he corrected the error in a subse- 
quent paper. He says: "It is clear that this mode of 
formation is entirely foreign to La Place's cosmogonic hypo- 
thesis; therefore we have no idea of deducing from this 
little experiment, which only refers to the effects of molecu- 
lar attraction, and not to those of gravitation, any argument 
in favor of the hypothesis in question ; an hypothesis which 
in other respects wc do not adopt "f 

It was always contrary to the facts of astronomical science. 
It has accordingly been repudiated by the most eminent 
astronomers. 

Sir John Herschel declares that the appearance of those 
groups, or clusters, of stars, supposed to be formed by the 
condensation of nebulae is quite different from that depicted 
by this theory, and that no traces of the ring-making 
process is visible among them. He thus describes the 
appearances of these groups; exactly the contrary of that 
demanded by the theory, which he emphatically disclaims, 
from the presidential chair of the British Association for 
the Advancement of Science. 

*The Earth, page 256. 

t Taylor's Scientific Memoirs, Vol. V., cited in McCosh's Typical 
Forms and Special Ends in Creation, p. 403. 



363 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



"If it is to be regarded as demonstrated truth, or as re- 
ceiving the smallest support from any observed numerical 
relations which actually hold good among the elements of the 
primary orbits. I beg leave to demur. Assuredly it receives no 
support from the observation of the effects of sidereal aggre- 
gation as exemplified in the formation of globular and ellip- 
tic clusters,- supposing them to have resulted from such 
aggregation. For we see this cause working out in thou- 
sands of instances, to have resulted, not in the formation of 
a single large central body, surrounded by a few smaller 
attendants disposed in one plane around it, but in systems 
of infinitely greater complexity, consisting of multitudes of 
nearly equal luminaries, grouped together in a solid elliptic 
or globular form. So far then as any conclusions from our 
observations of nebula? can go. the result of agglomerative 
tendencies may indeed be the formation of families of stars 
of a general and very striking character, but we see nothing 
to lead us to presume its further result to be the surround- 
ing of those stars with planetary adherents."* 

This theory is contradicted by the peculiarities of our solar 
system. The orbits of the comets being inclined at all an- 
gles to the sun's equator, are often out of the plane of his 
rotation, and so in the way of the theory. The moons of 
Uranus revolve in a direction contrary to all the other 
bodies, and fly right into the face of the theory. Accord- 
ing to the nebular theory, the outer planets, first cast off 
from the sun, ought to be lighter than those nearer him, as 
these had longer pressing near the middle of the mass: and 
the sun himself, having been pressed by the weight of all 
the rest of the system, should be the densest body of the 
whole. And the author of The Vestiges of Creation, in 
expounding the theory, manufactures a set of facts to suit 
it. and tells his readers that the planets exhibit a progres- 



* Opening Address to the British Association, 1845. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



369 



sive diminution in density from the one nearest the sun to 
that which is most distant. Our solar system could not 
have lasted thirty years had that been the ease. The Earth, 
Venus, and Mars, are nearly of the same density. Uranus 
is more dense than Saturn, which is nearer the sun. Nep- 
tune is more dense than either. The sun, which ought to 
be the heaviest of all, according to the theory, is only one- 
fourth thr density of the earth. La Place himself has 
demonstrate! that these densities and arrangements are in- 
dispensable t<» the stability of the system. But they are 
plainly contradictory to his theory of its formation.* 

The palpable difference of luminosity between the sun 
and the planets, which, as they are all made of the very 
same materials, and by the same process, according to this 
theory, ought to be equally self-luminous, is in itself a self- 
evident refutation of the nebular hypothesis, or of any 
other process of creation by mere mechanical law. "The 
same power, whether natural or supernatural, which placed 
the sun in the center of the six primary planets, placed 
Saturn in the ( enter of the orb of his five secondary plan- 
ets; and Jupiter in the center of his four secondary plan- 
ets; and the earth in the center of the moon's orbit; and, 
therefore, had this cause been a blind one, without contriv- 
ance or design, the sun would have been a body of the same 
kind with Saturn, Jupiter, and the Earth; that is, without 
light or heat. Why there is one body in our system quali- 
fied to give light and heat to all the rest, I know no reason, 
but because the Author of the system thought it conveni- 
ent." So says the immortal Newton. f 

The great expounder of modern science — Humboldt — is 

* Taking water as the unit of density, Mercury is 6.71; Yenus ? 
5.11; Earth, 5.44; Mars, 5.21; Saturn, 0.76; Uranus, 0.97; Nep- 
tune, 153 ; tin' Sun, 1.37.— Cosmos IY. p. 447. 

t Newton's Optics, IY. p. 438. 
24 



370 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



equally explicit in enumerating the decisive marks of choice 
and will in the construction of the solar system, and in con- 
temptuously dismissing the notion of development and cre- 
ation by natural law from the halls of science. 

" Up to the present time, we are ignorant, as I have al- 
ready Ti marked, of any internal necessity — any mechanical 
law of nature — which (like the beautiful law which connects ' 
the square of the periods of revolution with the cube of 
the major axis) represents the above-named elements — the 
absolute magnitude of the planets, their density, flattening 
at the poles, velocity of rotation, and presence or absence of 
moons — of the order of succession of the individual plane- 
tary bodies of each group, in their dependence upon the 
distances. Although the planet which is nearest the sun is 
densest — even six or eight times denser than some of the 
exterior planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune — 
the order of succession in the case of Venus, the Earth, 
and Mars, is very irregular. The absolute magnitudes do, 
generally, as Kepler has already observed, increase with the 
distances; but this does not hold good when the planets are 
considered individually. Mars is smaller than the Earth; 
Uranus smaller than Saturn; Saturn smaller than Jupiter, 
and isucceeds immediately to a host of planets, which, on 
account of their smallness, are almost immeasurable. It is 
true, the period of rotation generally increases with the 
distance from the sun ; but it is in the case of Mars slower 
than in that of the Earth, and slower in Saturn than in 
Jupiter."* 11 Our knowledge of the primeval ages of the 
world's physical history does not extend sufficiently far to 
allow of our depicting the present condition of things as 
one of development, "f 

Sir David Brewster adds his testimony as follows: u Geol- 
ogy does not .pretend to give us any information respecting 



* Cosmos, IV. p. 425. 
t Cosmos, III. p. 28. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



371 



the process by which the nucleus of the earth was formed. 
Some speculative astronomers indeed have presumptuously 
embarked in such an inquiry; but there is not a trace of 
evidence that the solid nucleus of the globe was formed by 
secondary causes, such as the aggregation of attenuated 
matter diffused through space; and the nebular theory, as it 
has been called, though maintained by a few distinguished 
names, has, we think, been overturned by arguments which 
have never been answered. Sir Isaac Newton, in his four 
celebrated letters to Dr. Bentlcy, has demonstrated that the 
planets of the solar system could not have been thus formed 
and put in motion round a central sun."* 

4. Astronomy not only exposes the folly of past cosmogo- 
nies, but demo ns/ rates the impossibility of framing any true 
theory of creation, and thus refutes all future cosmogonies. 

The grand error of all cosmogonies lies in the arrogant 
assumption, on which every one of them must be founded, 
that the theorist is acquainted with all substances, and all 
forces in the universe, and with all the modes of their oper- 
ation ; not only at the present period, and on this earth, but 
in all past ages, and in worlds in widely different, and utterly 
unknown situations ; for, if he be ignorant of any substance, 
or of any active force in the universe, his generalization is 
avowedly imperfect, and necessarily erroneous. That un- 
known force must have had its influence in framing the 
world. Its omission, then, is fatal to the theory which neg- 
lects it. A theory of creation, for instance, which would 
neglect the attraction of gravitation would be manifestly 
false. But there are other forces as far reaching, whose 
omission must be equally fatal; for instance, the power of 
repulsion. 

A conviction of this truth has given rise to a constant 
effort to simplify matters down to the level of our igno- 

* More Worlds Than One, p. 45. 



372 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



ranee, by reducing all substances to one, or at most two, sim- 
ple elements, and all forces to the ijprni of one universal 
law; but the progress of science utterly blasts the attempt. 
Instead of simplifying matters, the very chemical processes 
undertaken with that view revealed new substances, and 
every year increases our knowledge of nature's variety. No 
scientific man now dreams of one primeval element. In the 
same way, astronomy, which, it was boasted, would enable 
us to account for all the operations of the universe, by re- 
ducing all motion to one mechanical law, has revealed to us 
the existence of other forces as far reaching as the attrac- 
tion of gravitation, and more powerful; and substances 
whose nature and combinations are utterly unknown. But 
every cosmogony is just an attempt to simplify matters, by 
ignoring the existence of these unknown substances, and 
mysterious forces; a process which science condemns, as 
utterly unphilosophical and absurd. 

Astronomy has shown us our ignorance of the substances, 
or materials, of our own little globe. It has demonstrated 
that the whole body of the earth must have an average den- 
sity equal to iron. As the rocks near the surface are much 
lighter, those toward the center must be heavier than iron, 
to make up this density. Of what, then, do they consist? 
The geologist sa}^s he does not know. No geologist ever saw 
them. No mortal ever will see them, and report their 
chemical constitution, their dip, and the arrangement of 
their strata, to the American Association for the Advance- 
ment of Science. The very utmost " we can say is that they 
are unlike anything with which we are acquainted." Yery 
well; then be pleased to have the decency to abstain from 
telling us how the world was made, when you don't know 
what it is made of. 

The sun's heat, at its surface, is 300,000 times greater than 
at the surface of the earth, but a tenth of this amount, col- 
lected in the focus of a lens, dissipates gold and platinum in 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



373 



vapor. When the most vivid flames which we can produce 
are held up in the blaze of his rays, they disappear. If a 
cataract of icebergs, a mile high, and wider than the Atlan- 
tic Ocean, were launched into the sun with the velocity of 
a cannon-ball, the small portion of the sun's heat expended 
on our earth would convert that vast mass into steam as fast 
as it entered his atmosphere without cooling its surface in 
the least degree. '"The great mystery, however, is to con- 
ceive how so enormous a conflagration ( if such it be) can 
be kept up. Every discovery in chemical science here 
leaves us completely at a loss, or rather seems to remove 
farther the prospect of probable explanation."* Yet, the 
sun is the nearest of the fixed stars, and by far the best 
known, and most nearly related to us. In fact, we are de- 
pendent on his influences for life and health. But if the 
theorist can not tell his substance, or the nature and cause of 
the light and heat he sends us, how can he presume so far on 
the world's credulity as to present a theory of his formation? 

"Astronomical problems accumulate unsolved upon our 
hands, because we can not, as mechanicians, chemists, or 
physiologists, experiment on the stars. Are they built of 
the same material as our planet? Are Saturn's rings solid, 
or liquid? Has the moon an atmosphere? Are the atmos- 
pheres of the planet- like ours? Are the light and heat of 
the sun begotten of combustion? And what is the fuel 
which feeds these unquenchable fires? These are questions, 
which we ask, and variously answer, but leave unanswered 
after all"1[ But, till he can answer these, and a thousand 
questions like these, let no man presume to describe the 
formation of these unknown orbs. 

Comets constitute by far the greatest number of the 
bodies of our solar system. Arago says seven millions fre- 

* Herschel's Outlines, VI. Sect. 400. 

t Dr. George Wilson, E. R. S. E., in Edinburgh Phil. Journal, 
V. p. 53. 



374 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



quent it. within the orbit of Uranus.* They are the largest 
bodies known to us. stretching across hundreds of mil- 
lions of miles. They approach nearer to this earth than 
any other bodies, sometimes even involving it in their tails, 
and generally exciting great alarm amoDg its inhabitants. 
But the nature of the transparent luminous matter of which 
they are composed is utterly unknown. As they approach 
the sun, they come under an influence directly the opposite 
of attraction The tail streams away from the sun, over a 
distance of millions of miles, and yet the rate of the comets 
motion toward the sun is quickened, as though it were an 
immense rocket, driven forward by its own explosion. 

Further, while the body of the comet travels toward the 
sun, sometimes with a velocity nearly one-third of that of 
light, the tail sends forth coruscations in the opposite direc- 
tion, with a much greater velocity. The greatest velocity 
with which we are acquainted on earth is the velocity of 
light, which travels a million of times faster than a cannon- 
ball, or at the rate of 195.000 miles per secoud; but here 
is a substance capable of traveling twenty-three times 
faster, and here is a force propelling it, twenty-three times 
greater than any which exists on earth. Its existence was 
first discovered by the coruscations of the comet of IS 07. 
"In less than one second, streamers shot forth, to two and 
a half degrees in length ; they as rapidly disappeared, and 
issued out again, sometimes in proportions, and interrupted, 
like our northern lights. Afterward the tail varied, both in 
length and breadth ; and in some of the observations, the 
streamers shot forth from the whole expanded end of the 
tail, sometimes here, sometimes there, in an instant, two and 
a half degrees long; so that within a single second they must 
have shot out a distance of 4,600.000 mihs.j Similar ex- 

* Somerville's Connection of the Physical Sciences, p. 360. 
t Dick's Sidereal Heavens, chap. sx. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



375 



hibitions of this unknown force were made by the comet of 
1811, by Bailey's comet, and several others. 

In these amazing disclosures of the unknown forces of 
the heavens, do we not hear a voice rebuking the presump- 
tion of ignorant theorists, with the questions, Knowest thou 
the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion 
thereof in the earth? Hear one of the most distinguished 
of modern astronomers expound the moral bearings of such 
a discovery: "The intimation of a new cosmical power — I 
mean of one Bo unsuspected before, but which yet can fol- 
low a planet through all its wanderings — throws us back 
once more into the indefinite obscure, and checks all dog- 
matism. How many influences, hitherto undiscovered by 
our ruder senses, may be ever streaming toward us, and 
modifying every terrestrial action. And yet, because we had 
traced one of these, we have deemed our astronomy com- 
plete ! Deeper far, and nearer to the root of things, is that 
world with which man's destiny is entwined."* 

We can have no reason, ^ave our own self-sufficient arro- 
gance, to believe that the discovery of these two forces ex- 
hausts the treasures of infinite wisdom Humboldt thus 
well refutes the folly of such an imagination: "The imper- 
fectibility of all empirical science, and the boundlessness 
of the sphere of observation, render the task of explaining 
the forces of matter by that which is variable in matter, an 
impracticable one. What has been already perceived, by no 
means exhausts that which is perceptible. If, simply re- 
ferring to the progress of science in our own times, we com- 
pare the imperfect physical knowledge of Robert Boyle, 
Gilbert, and Hales, with that of the present day, and re- 
member that every few years are characterized by an in- 
creasing rapidity of advance, we shall be better able to 
imagine the periodica! and endless changes which all physi- 



* Nicholl's Solar System, p. 7G. 



376 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



cal sciences are destined to undergo. Nemo substances and 
new forces icill be discovered "* 

Thus, all true science, conscious of its ignorance, ever 
leads the mind to the region of faith. Its first lesson, and 
its last lesson, is humility. It tells us that every cosmogony, 
which the children of theory so laboriously scratch in the 
sand, must be swept away by the rising tide of science. 
When we seek information on the great questions of our 
origin and destiny, and cry, <• Where shall wisdom be found, 
and what is the place of understanding?"' the high priests 
of science answer, in her name, "It is not in me; the meas- 
ure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the 
sea." 

We receive this honest acknowledgment- as an inestimable 
boon. We are saved thereby the wearying labor of a vain 
and useless search after knowledge which lies not in her 
domain. We come down to the Bible with the profound 
conviction that science can give us no definite information 
of our origin, no certainty of our destiny, and but an im- 
perfect acquaintance with the laws which govern this pres- 
ent world. If the Bible can not inform us on these all- 
important questions, we must remain ignorant. Science 
declares she can not teach us. The Word of Grod remains, 
not merely the best, but absolutely the only, the last re- 
source of the anxious soul. 

The Bible gives us no theory of creation. It simply as- 
serts the fact, that "In the beginning God created the 
heaven and the earth,"' but does not tell us how he did so. 
The knowledge could be of no use to us, for he never means 
to employ us as his assistants in the work of creation. Xor 
could we understand the matter. The force by which he 
called the worlds into being, and upholds them in it, exists 
in no creature. " He stretcheth forth the heavens alone. 



* Cosmos, III. p. 27. 



INFIDELITY AMONG THE STARS. 



377 



He spreadeth abroad the earth by himself." "He uphold- 
eth all things by the word of his power." 

But it presents anxious, careworn, humbled souls with 
something infinitely more precious than cosmogonies; even 
an explicit declaration of the love toward them of him who 
made these worlds. 

"Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer, 
"And he who formed thee from the womb: 
"I am the Lord, who maketh all things; 
" Who stretcheth forth the heavens alone, 
"And spreadeth abroad the earth, by myself." 
"He healeth the broken in heart, 
"And bindeth up their wounds. 
" He telleth the number of the stars, 
" And calleth them all by their names. 
"Great is our Lord, and of great power; 
" His wisdom is infinite ! " 
Yes, the Creator of heaven and earth, who upholds all 
things by the word of his pow r er, became a man like you, 
and dwelt on earth, and suffered the sorrow, the shame, the 
pain, the death, that sinful man deserved; and when he had 
by himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of 
the Majesty on high. From that heavenly throne his voice 
now sounds, reader, in your ear, " Come unto me, all ye that 
labor and are heavy-laden, and I w ill give you rest" 



CHAPTER XI. 



Pa 



YLIGHT DEFORE 



jSlJN 



RISE, 



In the last chapter we saw astronomy demonstrating our 
need of a revelation from God. In this we shall see how 
it illustrates and confirms that revelation. Seen through 
the telescope, the Bible glows with celestial splendor. Even 
its cloudy mysteries are displayed as clouds of light, and 
its long misunderstood phra.-es are resolved, by a scientific 
investigation, into galaxies of brilliant truths, proclaiming 
to the philosopher that the Book which describes them is 
as truly the Word of Grod as the heavens which it describes 
are his handiwork. 

If, once in a century, a profound practical astronomer is 
found denying the inspiration of the Bible, he will either 
acknowledge, or discover himself, not familiar with its con- 
tents. For the most part, the charges brought against the 
Bible, of contradicting the facts of astronomy, are based 
upon misstatements and mistakes of its teachings, and so 
do not fall within the range of the telescope, or the depart- 
ment of the observatory. The Sabbath-school teacher, 
and not the astronomer, is the proper person to correct such 
errors. A few months' instruction in the Bible class of any 
well-conducted Sabbath-school would save some of our pop- 
ular anti-Bible lecturers from the sin of misrepresenting the 
"Word of Grod, and the shame of hearing children laugh at 
their blunders. 

A favorite field for the display of their knowledge of 
science, and ignorance of the art of reading, by our modern 

(378) 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



379 



Infidels, is the Bible account of creation, in the first chap- 
ter of Genesis, which is alleged to be utterly irreconcilable 
with the known facts of astronomy and geology. Leaving 
the latter out of view, for the present, the astronomical 
objections may all be arranged under four heads. First: 
that the Bible account of the creation of man, only some 
six or seven thousand years ago, must be false; because the 
records of astronomical observations, taken more than sev- 
enteen thousand years ago, by the Hindoos and Egyptians, 
are still in existence, and have been verified. Second: that 
the light of some of the stars, now shining upon us, and 
especially of some of the distant nebulae, must have left 
them millions of years ago, to have traveled over the vast 
space which separates them from us, and be visible on our 
globe now; whereas, the Bible teaches that the universe 
was created only some six or seven thousand years ago. 
Third: that the Bible represents God as creating the sky a 
solid crystal, or metallic sphere, or hemisphere (they are not 
agreed which), to which the stars are fastened, and with 
which they revolve around the earth; which every school- 
boy knows to be absurd. Fourth: that the Bible represents 
God as clearing the sun and moon only two days before 
Adam, and as creating light before the sun, which is also 
held to be absurd. 

1. The first of these objections — that the Hindoos and 
Egyptians made astronomical observations thousands of years 
before Adam, and that the accuracy of these observations 
has been verified by modern calculations — is simply untrue. 
No such observations were ever made._ The pretended 
records of such have been proved, in the case of the Hindoo 
astronomy, to be forgeries, and in the case of the Egyptian 
records, blunders of the discoverers. There is not an au- 
thentic uninspired astronomical observation extant for two 
thousand years after Adam. 

The objection, however, is worth noticing, and its history 



380 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



worth remembering, as a specimen of the way in which ig- 
norant men swallow impudent falsehoods, if they only seem 
to contradict the Word of Truth. When the labors of 
oriental scholars had made the Vedas and Shasters — the 
sacred books of the Hindoos— accessible to European phi- 
losophers, a wonderful shout was raised among Infidels. 
"Here," it was said, "is the true chronology. We always 
knew that man was not a degenerate creature, fallen from a 
higher estate, some few thousand years ago, but that he has 
existed from eternity, in a constant progress toward his 
present lofty position ; and now we have the most authentic 
records of the most ancient and civilized people in the 
world — the people of India — reaching back for millions of 
years before the Mosaic cosmogony, and allowing ample 
time for the development of the noble savage into the cul- 
tivated philosopher. These records have every mark of 
truth, giving minute details of events, and histories of suc- 
cessive lines of princes; and, moreover, record the princi- 
pal astronomical facts of the successive periods — eclipses, 
comets, positions of stars, etc. — which attest their veracity. 
Henceforth, the Hebrew records must hide their heads. 
Neither as poetry nor history can they pretend to compare 
with the Tedas." 

The Hindoo Shasters were accordingly, for a time, in high 
repute, among people who knew very little about them. Even 
Dr. Adam Clarke was so far led away with the spirit of the 
age, as to pollute his valuable commentary by the insertion 
of the Gitagovinda, after the Chaldee Targum on the Song 
of Solomon : where the curious reader can satisfy himself 
as to the scientific value of such Pantheistic dotings. By 
the Infidels of Britain and America they were appealed to 
as standard works of undoubted authority; and hundreds, 
who declared that it was irrational credulity to believe in 
the Bible, risked their souls on the faith of the Yedas, of 
which they never had read a single sentence! 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



381 



Now, when we remember that these veracious chronicles 
reach back through malia yugs of 4,320,000 years of mor- 
tals, a thousand of which, or 4,320,000,000, make a kalpa, 
or one day of the life of Brahma, while his night is of the 
same duration, and his life consists of a hundred years of 
such days and nights, about the middle of which period the 
little span of our existence is placed ; that among the facts 
of the history are the records of the seven great continents 
of the world, separated by seven rivers, and seven chains of 
mountains, four hundred thousand miles high (reaching only 
to the moon) ; of the families of their kings, one of whom 
had a hundred sons, another only ten thousand, another 
sixty thousand, who were born in a pumpkin, nourished in 
i pans of milk, reduced to ashes by the curse of a sage, and 
restored to life by the waters of the Ganges; and that 
among the astronomical observations, by which the accuracy 
of these extraordinary facts is confirmed, are accounts of 
deluges, in which the waters not only rose above the tops 
of earth's mountains, but above the seven inferior and three 
superior worlds, reaching even to the Pole Star* — we may 
well wonder at the faith which could receive all this as so 
true, that on the strength of it they rejected the miracles 
of the Bible as false. Even Voltaire ridiculed these stories. 

But a visionary man, named Baillie, calculated the alleged 
observations backward, and found them sufficiently correct 
to satisfy him that all the rest of the story was equally true. 
It never seems to have occurred to him, that if he could 
calculate eclipses hachward, so could the Hindoos. It is 
just as easy to calculate an eclipse, or the position of a 
planet, backward as forward. If I watch the motion of the 
hands of a clock accurately, and find that the little hand 
moves over the twelfth of a circle every hour, and the large 
hand around the circle in the same time, and that the large 



* Duff's India, 127. 



382 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



hand, now at noon, covers the little one, I can calculate, 
that at at sixteen minutes and a quarter past three it will 
nearly cover it again ; but then, it is just as easy to count 
that the two hands were covered at sixteen minutes and a 
quarter before nine that morning, or that they were exactly 
in line at 6 A. M. If my clock would keep going at the 
same rate for a thousand years, I could predict the position 
of the hands at any hour of the twenty-ninth of March, of 
the year 2857 ; but it is evident that the very same calcu- 
lation applied the other way would show the position that 
the hands would have had a thousand years ago, or five 
thousand years ago, just as well. And if I were to allege 
that my clock was made by Tubal Cain, before the flood, 
and for proof of the fact declare, that on the first of Janu- 
ary, 3857 B. C, at 6 o'clock P. M., I had seen the two 
hands directly in line, and some wiseacre were to calculate 
the time, and find that at that hour the hands ought to have 
been just in that position, and conclude thence that I was 
undoubtedly one of the antediluvians, and the clock no less 
certainly a specimen of the craft of the first artificer in 
brass and iron, the argument would be precisely parallel to 
the Infidel's argument from the Tirvalore Tables, and the 
astronomy of the Vedas. 

But suppose my clock ran a little slow ; say half a min- 
ute in the month, or so ; or that it was made to keep sider- 
eal time, which differs by a little from solar time, and that I 
did not know exactly what the difference was ; it is evident 
that on a long stretch of some hundreds or thousands of 
years, I would get out of my reckoning, and the hands 
would not have been in the positions I had calculated. Now, 
this was just what happened with the Brahmins and their 
calculations. The clock of the heavens keeps a uniform 
rate of going, but they made a slight mistake in the count- 
ing of it; and so did their Infidel friends. But our modern 
astronomers have got the true time, set their clocks, and 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



383 



made their tables by it; and on applying these tables to the 
pretended Hindoo observations, find that they are all wrong, 
and that no such eclipses as they allege ever did occur or pos- 
sibly could have happened in our solar system. * So the Hin- 
doo astronomy is now consigned to the same tomb with the 
Hindoo chronology and cosmogony, except when a mission- 
ary, on the banks of the Ganges, exhibits it to the pupils of 
his English school, as a specimen of the falsehoods which 
have formed the swaddling bands of Pantheism. 

Failing in the attempt to substitute Brahminism for 
Christianity, Infidels beat a retreat from India, and went 
down into Egypt for help. Here they made prodigious 
discoveries of the scientific and religious truths believed by 
the worshipers of dogs and dung beetles, recorded upon the 
coffins of holy bulls, and the temples sacred to crows and 
crocodiles. The age was favorable for such discoveries. 

Napoleon and his savans cut out of the ceiling of a tem- 
ple, at Denderah. in Egypt, a stone covered with uncouth 
astronomical, astrological, and hieroglyphic figures, which 
they insisted was a representation of the sky at the time 
the temple was built; and finding a division made between 
the signs of the crab and the lion, and marks for the sun 
and moon there, they took it into their heads that the sun 
must have entered the Zodiac at that spot, on the year this 
Zodiac was made; and, calculating back, found that must be 
at least seventeen thousand years ago. Hundreds of thou- 
sands visited the wonderful antediluvian monument, in the 
National Library, in Paris, where it had been brought; and 
where Infidel commentators were never wanting to inform 
them that this remarkable stone proved the whole Bible to 
be a series of lies. A professor of the University of Bres- 
lau published a pamphlet, entitled Invincible Proof that the 
Earth is at least ten times older than is taught by the Bible. 

* Somcrvi lie's Connection of the Physical Sciences, p. 83. 



384 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



Scores of such publications followed, and for forty years In- 
fidel newspapers, magazines, and reviews kept trumpeting 
this great refutation of the Bible. From these it descended 
to the vulgar, with additions and improvements; and it is 
now frequently alleged as proving that "ten thousand years 
before Adam was born, the priests of Egypt were carving 
astronomy on the pyramids. " : There is scarcely one of my 
French or German readers who has not heard of it. 

It did not shake the Skeptic's credulity in the least that 
no two of the savans were agreed, by some thousands of 
years, how old it was — that they could not tell what the 
Egyptian system of astronomy was — and that none of them 
could read the hieroglyphics which explained it. Whatever 
might be doubtful, of one thing they were all perfectly sure, 
that it was far older than the creation. But in 1832 the 
curious Egyptian astronomy was studied, and it appeared 
that the sun and moon were so placed on the Zodiac to mark 
the beginning of the year there; and the dividing line 
fenced off one-half of the sky under the care of the sun, 
while the other was placed under the moon's patronage. 
Then it was discovered that the positions of the stars were 
represented by the pictures of the gods whose names they 
bore — Jupiter, Saturn, etc. — and by calculating the places 
of these pictures back, it was found that this Zodiac repre- 
sented their places in the year of our Lord 37 ; the year of 
the birth of Xero, a great temple-builder and repairer. 
Finally, Champollion learned to read the hieroglyphics, and 
the names, surnames, and titles of the emperors Tiberius, 
Claudius, Xero, and Doniitian were found on the temple of 
Denderah; and on the portico of the temple of Esneh, 
which had been declared to be a few thousand years older 
than that of Denderah, were found the names of Claudius and 
Antoninus Pius; while the whole workmanship and style of 
building have satisfied all antiquarians that these buildings 
were erected during the declining days of art in the Roman 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



385 



Empire. The Roman title, autocrat, engraved on the Zodiac 
itself, attests its antiquity to be not quite two thousand, in- 
stead of seventeen thousand years. 

But, not satisfied with merely demolishing the batteries 
of Infidelity, astronomy has been employed to ascertain the 
dates of numbers of events recorded on Egyptian monu- 
ments to have happened to one or other of the Pharaohs, 
"beloved of Amnion, and brother of the sun," when such a 
star was in such a position. Mr. Poole has spent years in 
gathering such inscriptions, and in calculating the dates 
thus furnished. The astronomer royal, at Greenwich, Mr. 
Airy, has reviewed the calculations, and finds them correct. 
Wilkinson, the great Egyptologist, agrees with their con- 
clusions. And the result is, that the astronomical chronology 
of the Egyptian monuments sustains the Bible chronology* 
Geology comes forward to confirm the testimony of her 
elder sister, and assures us, that the alleged vast antiquity 
of the Egyptian monuments is impossible, as it is not more 
than 5,000 years since the soil of Egypt first appeared 
above water, as a muddy morass. f The learned Adrian 
Balbo thus sums up the whole question : " No monument, 
either astronomical or historical, has yet been able to prove 
the books of Moses false; but with them, on the contrary, 
agree, in the most remarkable manner, the results obtained by 
the most learned philologists and the profoundest geometri- 
cians. "$ 

2. To the second objection — that astronomers have dis- 
covered stars* whose light must have been millions of years 
traveling to this earth, and that consequently these stars 
must have existed millions of years ago, and therefore the 
Bible makes a false declaration when it says the universe was 

* Poole's Horce Egyptiacse. 
f Henri L'Egypte Pharonique. 
I Atlas Ethnographique, Eth. I. 
25 



386 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



created only some six or seven thousand years ago- — I reply 
by asking, Where does the Bible say so? 

" What/' says our objector, "is not that the good old or- 
thodox doctrine of Christians and commentators? Do they 
not unanimously denounce geologists and astronomers as 
heretics, for asserting the vast antiquity of the earth ? " 

We shall see presently that no such unanimity of denun- 
ciation has ever existed, and that some of the most ancient 
and learned Christian commentators taught the antiquity of 
the earth, from the Bible, before geology was born. But 
that is not the question before us just now. We are not 
asking what the good old orthodox doctrine of Christians, 
or the unanimous opinion of commentators may have been ; 
but what is the reading of the Bible — What does this Book 
say? — not, "What does somebody think?" 

'•Well," replies our objector, "does not the Bible say, in 
the first of Genesis, that God created the heavens and the 
earth in six days, aud Adam on the sixth; and are not 
chronologists agreed that that was not more than seven 
thousand years ago, at the very utmost?'' 

If the Bible had said that God created the heavens and 
the earth in six days, and that the end of that' period was 
only seven thousand years ago, it would by no means fol- 
low that the beginning of it was only a few hours before 
that; for every Bible reader knows, that the most common 
use of the word day, in Scripture, is to denote, not a period 
of twenty-four hours, but a period of time which may be ot 
various lengths.* In this very narrative (Genesis ii. 5) it 
is used to denote the whole period of the six days' work : 
" In the day the Lord God made the earth and the heav- 
ens." Does it mean just twenty-four hours there? In the 
first of Genesis, its duration is defined to consist of "the 
evening and the morning." Before our Infidel chronologist 

* See Cruden's Concordance, Art. Day. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



387 



finds out the Bible date of creation, he must be able to tell 
us of what length was ike evening which preceded the first 
morning ) and with it constituted the first day? God has of 
set purpose placed stumbling-blocks for scoffers at the en- 
trance and the exit of the Bible, as a rebuke to pride and 
vain curiosity.* 

The duration of the seventh day is also hidden from man. 
It is God's Sabbath, on which he entered when he ceased 
from the work of creation, a rest which still continues, and 
which he invites us to enter into (Hebrews iv. 1-5) as a 
preparation for the eternal rest. God's rest day has already 
lasted six thousand years, and no man can tell how much 
longer it may last. Perhaps his working days were each as 
long. 

But if our objector had read the Bible attentively, he 
would have seen that it does not say that God created the 
heavens and the earth in six days. Before it begins to give 
any account of the six days' work, it tells us of a previous 
state of disorder; and going back beyond that again, it 
says: u In the beginning, God created the heavens and the 
earth." It is as self-evident that this beginning was before 
the six days' work, as that the world must have existed be- 
fore it could be adjusted to its present form. How long be- 
fore, the Bible does not say, nor does the objector pretend 
to know. It may have been as many millions of years as he 
assigns to the stars, or twice as many, for anything he knows 
to the contrary. He must have overlooked the first two 
verses of the Bible, else he had never made this objection; 
which is simply a blunder, arising from incapacity to read a 
few verses of Scripture correctly. 

But it is replied, 11 Does not the Bible say, in the fourth 
commandment, ' In six days the Lord made heaven, and 
earth, and the sea, and all that in them is,'" etc.? True. 

* Dan. chap. xii. 10. Job, chap, xxxviii. 4. Col., chap. ii. 18. 



3S8 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



But we are speaking just now of a very different work — the 
work of creation. If any one does not know the difference 
between create and make, let him turn to his dictionary, and 
Webster will inform him that the primary literal meaning of 
create is, " To produce ; to bring into being from nothing ; 
to cause to exist. " The example he gives to illustrate his 
definition is this verse, " In the beginning God created the 
heavens and the earth. ;; But the primary meaning of make 
is, " To compel; to constrain; " thence, "to form of ma- 
terials;" and he illustrates the generic difference between 
these two words by a quotation from Dwight : " God not 
only made, but created; he not only made the work, but 
the materials." Both words are as good translations of the 
Hebrew originals, bra. and oshe, as can be given. 

If any of my readers has not a dictionary he can satisfy 
himself thoroughly as to the different meanings of these two 
words, and of their equivalents in the original Hebrew, by 
looking at their use in his Bible. Thus, he will find create 
applied to the creation of the heavens and the earth, in the 
beginning, when there could have been no pre-existent ma- 
terials to make them from; unless we adopt the Atheistic 
absurdity, of the eternity of matter — that is to say, that the 
paving-stones made themselves * Then it is applied to the 
production of animal life — verse twenty-one — which is not 
a product or combination of any lifeless matter, but a direct 
and constant resistance to the chemical and mechanical laws 
which govern lifeless matter : " God created great whales, 
and every living creature that moveth."f Next it is applied 
to the production of the human race, as a species distinct 
from all other living creatures, and not derived from any of 
them. :i God created man in his own image. "J It is in like 
manner applied to all God's subsequent bestowals of animal 

* Chap. I. Did the World Make Itself ? 
j Genesis, chap. i. 21. 
+ Genesis, chap. i. 27. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



389 



life and rational souls, which are directly bestowed by God, 
and are not in the power of any creature to give. " Thou 
scndest forth thy spirit: they are created." "Remember 
now thy Creator, in the days of thy youth."* In all these 
instances, the use of the word determines its literal mean- 
ing to be what Webster defines it : " To bring into being 
from nothing." 

The metaphorical use of the word is equally expressive 
of its literal meaning, for it is applied to the production of 
new dispositions of mind and soul utterly opposite to those 
previously existing. " Create in me a clean heart; " which 
God thus explains : "A new heart will I give you, and a new 
spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony 
heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of 
flesh, "f The Hebrew word bra has as many derivative 
meanings as our English word create ; as we speak of " creat- 
ing a peer," "long abstinence creating uneasiness," etc.; 
but these no more change the primitive idea in the one case 
than in the other. 

From this word create, the Bible very plainly distinguishes 
the words make and form, using them as the complement 
of the former, in many passages which speak of both crea- 
tion and making. Thus, man was both created and made. 
His life and soul are spoken of as a creation ; his body as a 
formation from the dust; his deputed authority over the 
earth also implies a primal creation, and subsequent investi- 
ture ; and so both terms are applied to it So the words 
make and form are applied to the production of the bodies 
of animals from pre-existing materials, while animal life is 
ever spoken of as a product of creative power. But, that 
we may sec that these processes are distinct, and that the 
words which express them have distinctive meanings, the 

* Psalm civ. 30. Eccl. chap. xii. 1. 

t Psalm li. 10. Ezeldel, chap, xxxvi. 26. 



390 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



Autlior of the Bible takes care to use them both in reference 
to this very work, in such a way that we can not fail to per- 
ceive he intends some distinction, unless we suppose that he 
fills the Bible with useless tautologies. For instance, " On 
the seventh day, God rested from all his work, which God 
created and made.''' "These are the generations of the 
heavens and the earth, when they were created; in the day 
the Lord God made the earth and the heavens." "But now 
thus saith the Lord that created thee, Jacob, and he that 
formed thee, Israel." "For thus saith the Lord that 
created the heavens, God himself, that formed the earth, 
and made it; he hath established it; he created it not in 
confusion; he formed it to be inhabited."* In all these 
passages creation is clearly distinguished from formation and 
making, if the Bible is not a mass of senseless repetitions. 
If create, and make, and form, have all the same meaning, 
why use them all in the same verse ? These, and many sim- 
ilar passages, show that the Bible teaches the work of crea- 
tion — calling things into being — to be previous to and dis- 
tinct from the work of making — forming of materials already 
created. 

Between these two widely different processes — of the 
original creation of the universe, and the subsequent prep- 
aration of the habitable earth, by the six days' work — two 
intervening periods are indicated by Scripture, both of in- 
definite length. The first of these is that which intervened 
between the original creation and the period of disorder in- 
dicated in the second verse. The second is that disordered 
period during which the earth continued without form and 
void. 

That original chaos which some would find in the second 
verse, never had any existence, save in the brains of Athe- 
istic philosophers. It is purely absurd. God never created 

* Genesis, chap. ii. 1-5. Isaiah, chap, xliii. 1-7; chap. xlv.. 1, 2. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



391 



a chaos. Man never saw it. The crystals of the smallest 
grain of sand, the sporules of the humblest fungus on the 
rotten tree, the animalculse in the filthiest pool of mud, are 
as orderly in their arrangements, as perfect after their kind, 
and as wisely adapted to their station, as the angels before 
the throne of (fod. And as man never saw, so he has no 
language to describe, a state of original disorder; for every 
wor 1 he can use implies a previous state of regularity; as, 
disorder tells of order dissolved; con-fusion of previous 
forms melted together. So the poets who have tried to de- 
scribe a chaos have been obliged to represent it as the wreck 
of a former state. 

Both the Bible language and the Bible narrative corre- 
spond to the philosophy and philology of the case; for, by 
the use of the substantive verb, in the past tense, implying 
progressive being, according to the usual force of the word 
in Hebrew, we are told literally, " the earth became without 
form and void." God did not create it so, but after it was 
created, and by a series of revolutions not recorded, it be- 
came disordered and empty. The Holy Spirit takes care 
to explain this verse, by quoting it in Jeremiah iv. 23, as 
the appropriate symbolical description of the state of a pre- 
viously existing and regularly constituted body politic, re- 
duced to confusion by the calamities of war. Again, he 
explains both the terms used in it in Isaiah xxxiv. 11, by 
using them to describe, not the rude and undigested mass of 
the heathen poet, but the wilderness condition of a ravaged 
country, and the desolate ruins of once beautiful and popu- 
lous cities : " He will stretch out upon it the line of confu- 
sion, and the stones of emptiness," In both these cases the 
previous existence of an orderly and populous state is im- 
plied. And finally, we are expressly assured, that the state 
of disorder mentioned in the second verse of Genesis i , was 
not the original condition of the earth — Isaiah xlv. 18 — 
where the very same word is used as in Genesis i. 2, " He 



392 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



created it not, teu, disordered, in confusion." The period of 
the earth's previous existence in an orderly state, or that 
occupied by the revolutions and catastrophes which disor- 
dered its surface, is not recorded in Scripture. 

The second period is that of disorder, which must have 
been of some duration, more or less, and is plainly implied 
to have been of considerable length, in the declaration that 
'■the Spirit of the Lord moved ,; — literally, icas brooding 
(a figure taken from the incubation of fowls) — " upon the 
face of the waters." But no portion of Scripture gives 
any intimation of the length of this period. 

If, then, astronomers and geologists assert that the earth 
was millions, or hundreds of millions of years in process of 
preparation for its present state, by a long series of succes- 
sive destructions and renovations, and gradual formations, 
there is not one word in the Bible to contradict that opinion ; 
but, on the contrary, very many texts which fully and 
unequivocally imply its truth. But, as the knowledge of the 
exact age of the earth is by no means necessary to any man's 
present happiness, or the salvation of his soul, it is nowhere 
taught in the Bible. G-od has given us the stars to teach 
us astronomy, the earth to teach us geology, and the Bible 
to teach us religion, and neither contradicts the other. 

This is no new interpretation evoked to meet the neces- 
sities of modern science. The Jewish Rabbins, and those 
of the early Christian Fathers who gave any attention to 
criticism, are perfectly explicit in recognizing these dis- 
tinctions. The doctrine of the creation of the world only 
six or seven thousand years ago is a product of monkish 
ignorance of the original language of the Bible. But 
Clement of Alexandria, Chrysostom, and Gregory Nazianzen, 
after Justin Martyr, teach the existence of an indefinite 
period between the creation and the formation of all things. 
Basil and Origen account for the existence of light before 
the sun, by alleging that the sun existed, but that the cha- 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



393 



otic atmosphere prevented his rays from being visible till 
the first day, and his light till the third.* Augustine, in 
his first homily, represents the first state of the earth, in 
Genesis i. 1, as bearing the same relation to its finished 
state, that the seed of a tree does to the trunk, branches, 
leaves, and fruit. Horsley, Edward King, Jennings, Bax- 
ter, and many others, who wrote during the last two cen- 
turies, but before the period of geological discovery, 
explained the second verse substantially as did Bishop 
Patrick, a hundred and fifty years ago. " How long all 
things continued in confusion, we are not told. It might 
have been, for anything that is here revealed, a very great 

Some persons, however, have supposed that the chaos of 
the second verse succeeded immediately to the creation of 
the first, and that the six days' work in like manner followed 
that instantaneously, or at least after a very brief interval, 
because the records of these cycles are connected by the 
word and, which, they think, precludes the idea of any 
lengthened periods or intervals But the slightest reflection 
upon the meaning of the word will show that and can not 
of itself be any measure of time, its use being to indicate 
merely sequence and connection. When used historically, it 
always implies an interval of time; for there can be no suc- 
cession without an interval; but the length of that interval 
must be determined from the context, or some other source. 
A very cursory perusal of the Bible, either in English or 
Hebrew, will show that very often in its brief narratives, 
the interval indicated by and, and its Hebrew originals, is 
a very long time. The descent of Jacob and his children 
into Egypt is connected with the record of their deaths, in 

* Wiseman's Lectures on the Connection of Science and licvealed 
Religion, 1-237. 

f Commentary on Genesis i. 2. 



394 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



the very next verse, by this word and, which thus includes 
nearly the lifetime of a generation. That event, again, is 
connected with a change of dynasty in Egypt, and the op- 
pression and multiplication of the Israelites there, recorded 
in the. next verse, by the same word, van, and; while the 
period over which it reaches was over two hundred years.* 
So in the brief record of the family of Adam, after reciting 
the birth of Seth, the historian adds, in the next verse, 
"And to Seth also was born a son, and he called his name 
Enos;" while the interval thus indicated by the word and 
was a hundred and five years. The command to build the 
ark, recorded in the last verse of the sixth chapter of Gen- 
esis, is connected with the command to enter into it, in the 
first verse of the seventh chapter, by this same word and, 
although we know, from the nature of the case, that the in- 
terval required for the construction of such a huge vessel 
must have been considerable ; and from the third verse of 
the sixth chapter, we learn that it was a hundred and twenty 
years. So the births and deaths of the antediluvians are 
connected by this same word and, throughout the fifth 
chapter of Genesis; while the interval, as we see from the 
narrative, was often eight or nine hundred years. The 
descent of the Holy Spirit upon Christ, to qualify him for 
judging the world, is connected with the actual discharge of 
that office, in the destruction of Antichrist by the breath 
of his mouth, by this word and,~\ although the interval has 
been over eighteen hundred years. If in the records' of the 
generations of mortal men, the word and, is customarily 
employed as a connecting link in the narrations of events 
separated by an interval of hundreds of years, it is quite 
consistent with the strictest propriety of language to em- 
ploy it, with an enlargement proportioned to the duration of 



* Exodus, chap. i. 5, 8. 
t Isaiah, chap. xi. 8, 4. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



395 



the subject of discourse, to connect intervals of millions, in 
the narrative of the generations of the heavens and the earth. 

The Bible uniformly attributes the most remote antiquity 
to the work of creation So far from supposing man to be 
even approximately coeval with it, the emphatic reproof of 
human presumption is couched in the remarkable words, 
"Where wast thou, when I laid the foundations of the 
earth?" In majestic contrast with the frail human race, 
Moses glances at the primeval monuments of God's antiquity, 
as though by them he could form some faint conceptions 
even of eternity, and sings, " Before the mountains were 
brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the 
universe, even from everlasting to everlasting thou art God."* 

The very word here used, the beginning, is in itself an 
emphatic refutation of the notion that the work of creation 
is only some six or seven thousand years old. Geologists 
have been unable to invent a better, and have borrowed from 
the Bible this very form of speech, to designate those strata 
beyond which human knowledge can not penetrate — the 
'primary formations. But, with far greater propriety, the 
Holy Spirit uses this word with regard to ages, compared 
with which the utmost range of the astronomer's or geolo- 
gist's reasonings is but as the tale of yesterday. For this 
word, in Bible usage, marks the last promontory on the 
boundless ocean of eternity; the only positive word by 
which we can express the most remote period of past dura- 
tion. It is not a date — a point of duration. It is a period 
— a vast cycle. * It has but one boundary ; that where crea- 
tion rises from its abyss. Created eye has never seen the 
other shore. It is that vast period which the Bible assigns 
to the manifestations of the Word of God, "whose goings 
forth have been of old, from everlasting." Carrying our 
astonished gaze far back beyond the era of his creature, 



* Psalm xc. 



396 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



man, and ages before the "all tilings" that were made by 
Him, the Bible places this beginning on the very shore of the 
eternity of God, when it declares, '-In the beginning was 
the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was 
God."* Thus, both by the rise of the imperfect tense, was, 
denoting continued existence, and by the connection of this 
beginning with the eternity of the Word, does the Bible 
teach us to dismiss from our thoughts all narrow views of 
the period of duration employed in manifesting the glory 
of the self-existent Eternal One, and to raise our concep- 
tions to the highest possible pitch, and then to feel, that far 
beyond the grasp of human calculation lies that beginning 
which includes the years of the right hand of the Most 
High, and is even used as one of the names of the Eternal : 
"I am the Beginning and the Ending, saith the Lord, 
who is, and who was, and icho is to come — the Almighty.""!* 

In another Bible exhibition of the eternity of the Son of 
God, we are conducted from that beginning, downward, 
stage by stage, from those periods oF remote antiquity prior 
to the formation of water, the upheaval of the mountains, 
the alluvial deposits, the subsidence of the existing sea 
basins, and the adornment of the habitable parts of the 
earth, to that comparatively recent event, the existence of 
the sons of men. Our ideas of the eternity of the love of 
Christ are thus enhanced, by the vastness of the ages which 
stretch out between the human race and that beginning when 
He was, as it were, " The Lamb slain from before the founda- 
tions of the world " 

" The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, 

" Before his icorks of old. 

"I was set up from everlasting, 

" From the beginning, or ever the earth was. 



* John, chap. i. 1. 

f Revelation, chap. i. 8. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



397 



" When there were no depths, I was brought forth ; 
"When there were no fountains, abounding with water; 
"Before the mountains were settled, 
"Before the hills, was I brought forth; 
u While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, 
" Nor the highest part of the dust of the world 
"When he prepared the heavens, I was there; 
" When he described a circle upon the face of the deep ; 
"When he established the clouds above; 
"When he strengthened the fountains of the deep; 
"When he gave to the sea his decree, 
"That the waters should not pass his commandment; 
"When he appointed the foundations of the earth: 
" Then was I by him, as one brought up with him ; 
" And I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him : 
"Rejoicing in the habitab'e parts of his earth; 
"And my delights were with the sons of men."* 
Let the geologist, then, penetrate as deeply as he can into 
the profundities of the foundations of the earth, and bring 
forth the monuments of their hoary antiquities : we will 
follow with the most unfaltering faith, and receive with joy 
these proofs of his eternal power and Godhead. Let the 
astronomer raise his telescope, and reflect on our astonished 
eyes the light which flashed from morning stars, on the day 
of this earth's first existence, or even the rays which began 
to travel from distant suns, millions of years ere the first 
morning dawned on our planet: we will place them as jewels 
in the crown of Him who ii the bright and morning star. 
They shall shod a sacred luster over the pages of the Bible, 
and give new beauties of illustration to its majestic sym- 
bols. But never will geologist penetrate, much less exhaust, 
the profundity of its mysteries, nor astronomer attain, much 
less explore, the sublimity of that beginning revealed in 



* Proverbs, chap. viii. 22. 



398 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



its pages ; for eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor hath it 
entered into the heart of man to conceive, either the an- 
tiquity, or the nature, or the duration of the things which 
God hath prepared for them that lore him, Human science 
will never be able to reach the Bible era of creation. It is 
placed in an antiquity beyond the power of human calcula- 
tion, in that sublime sentence with which it introduces 
mortals to the Eternal: "In the beginning God created the 
heavens and the earth" 

3. The third objection we have named is equally un- 
founded. The Bible nowhere teaches that the shy is a solid 
sphere, to which the stars are fixed, and which revolves with 
them around the earth. I know that Infidels allege that the 
word firmament, in the first chapter of Genesis, conveys 
this meaning. It does not. Neither the English word, nor 
the Hebrew original, has any such meaning. As to the 
meaning of the English word, I adhere to the dictionary. 
Infidels must not be allowed to coin uncouth meanings for 
words, different from the known usage of the English 
tongue, for which Webster is undeniable authority. His 
definition of firmament is, "The region of the air; the sky, 
or heavens. In Scripture, the word denotes an expanse — a 
wide extent; for such is the signification of the Hebrew 
word, coinciding with regio, region, and reach. The orig- 
inal, therefore, does not convey the sense of solidity, but 
of stretching — extension. The great arch or expanse over 
our heads, in which are placed the atmosphere and the 
clouds, and in which the stars appear to be placed, and arc 
really seen." The word firmament, then, conveys no such 
meaning as the Infidel alleges, to any man who understands 
the English tongue. 

No Hebrew speaking man or woman ever did, or ever 
could understand the original Hebrew word reqo in any 
other sense than that of expanse; for the verb from which 
it is formed means to extend, or spread out 5 as even the 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



399 



English reader may see, by a few examples of its use, in 
the following passages of Scripture; where the English 
words by which the verb reqo is expressed, are marked in 
italics. " Then did I beat them small as the dust of the 
earth, and did stamp them as the mire of the street, and 
did spread them abroad.''' "The goldsmith spreadeth it 
over with gold." "Thus saith the Lord: he that created 
the heavens, and stretched them out ; he that spread forth 
the earth." "I am the Lord, that maketh all things; that 
stretcheth forth the heavens alone, and spreadeth abroad 
the earth by myself." "To him that stretcheth out the 
earth above the waters." "The censers of these sinners 
against their own souls, let them make them broad plates, 

• for a covering for the altar. And they were made broad." 

- "Hast thou with him spread out the sky;"* or, in Hum- 
boldt's elegant rendering, "the pure ether, spread (during 
the scorching heat of the south wind) as a melted mirror 
over the parched desert, "f We might refer to the opin- 
ions of lexicographers, all unanimous in ascribing the same 
idea to the word; but the authorities given above are con- 
clusive. The meaning, then, of the Hebrew word rendered 
firmament is so utterly removed from the notion of com- 
pactness, or solidity, or metallic or crystalline spheres, that 
it is derived from the very opposite; the fineness or tenuity 
produced by processes of expansion. Science has not been 
able to this day to invent a better word for the regions of 
space than the literal rendering of the original Hebrew word 
used by Moses — the expanse. 

The inspired writers of the New Testament, though they 
found the world full of all the absurdities of the Greek 

*2 Samuel, chap, xxii. 43. Isaiah, chap. xl. 19; chap. xliv. 24; 
chap. xlii. 5. Psalm exxxvi. G. Number?, chap. xvii. 88. Jol^ 
chap, xxxvii. 18. 

f Cosmos v. 2, p. GO. 



400 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



philosophy, and their Greek translations of the Bihle con- 
tinually using the word stereoma, which expressed these 
notions, never used it but once, and then not for the sky, but 
for the steadfastness of faith in Christ. Their thus using it 
once shows that they were acquainted with the word, and 
its proper meaning, and that their disuse of it was inten- 
tional ; while their disuse of it, and choice of another word 
to denote the heavens, proves decisively that they disap- 
proved of the absurdity which it was understood to express. 
Now, whether you account for this fact by admitting their 
inspiration, or by alleging that they drew their language 
from the Hebrew original, and not from the Greek transla- 
tion, it is in either case perfectly conclusive as to the scrip- 
tural meaning of the word. Indeed, it is marvelous how 
any man who is familiar with his Bible, and knows that the 
Scriptures usually describe the sky by metaphors convey- 
ing the very opposite ideas to those of solidity or perma 
nence — as, "stretched out like a curtain," "spread abroad 
like a tent to dwell in," " folded up like a vesture," and the 
like — -should allow himself to be imposed on by the impu- 
dent falsehood of Yoltaire, that the Bible teaches us that 
the sky is a solid metallic or crystal hemisphere, supported 
by pillars. 

Those beautiful figures of sacred poetry in which the 
universe is represented as the palace of the Great King, 
adorned with majestic "pillars," and "windows of heaven," 
whence he scatters his gifts among his expectant subjects 
in the courts below, have been grossly abused for the sup- 
port of this miserable falsehood. We are assured, that so 
ignorant was Moses of the true nature of the atmosphere, 
and of the origin of rain, that he believed and taught that 
there was an ocean of fresh water on the outside of this 
metal hemisphere, which covered the earth like a great 
sugar-kettle, bottom upward, and was supported on pillars ; 
and at the bottom of the ocean were trap-doors, to let the 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



401 



rain through ; which trap-doors in the metal firmament are 
to be understood, when the Bible speaks of the windows of 
heaven. Now, the bottom of an ocean is an odd place for 
windows, and a trap-door is rather a strange kind of water- 
ing-pot ; and if Moses put the ocean of fresh water on the 
outside of his metal hemisphere, he must have changed his 
notions of gravity materially from the time he planned the 
brazen hemisphere for the tabernacle, which he turned mouth 
upward, and put the water in the inside. 

While such writers are quite clear about the metal trap- 
doors and the ocean, they have not yet fully fathomed the 
construction and arrangement of the pillars. Whether the 
Bible teaches that they are " pillars of salt," like Lot's 
wife, or of flesh and blood, like "James, Cephas, and John," 
or such "iron pillars and brazen walls" as Jeremiah was 
against the house of Israel — whether they consisted of 
"cloud and fire," like die pillar Moses describes in the next 
book as floating in the sky over the camp of Israel, or are 
"pillars of smoke," such as ascend out of the wilderness — 
whether they are those "'pillars of the earth which tremble" 
when God shakes it, or "the pillars of heaven which are 
astonished at his reproof" — whether they are the pillars of 
the earth and its anarchical inhabitants, which Asaph bore 
up, or are composed of the same materials as Paul's "pillar 
and basis of the truth," or the pillars of victory which 
Christ erects "in the temple of God "* — they have not yet 
decided. Whether the Hebrews understood these pillars 
to be arranged on the outside of the metal hemisphere, and 
if so, to imagine any use for them there; or in the inside, 
and in that case whether they kept the sky from falling 
upon the earth, or only supported the earth from falling 

* Genesis, chap. xix. 26. Exodus, chap. xiii. 20; chap, xxxiii. 10. 
Jeremiah, chap. i. 18. Galatians, chap. ii. 7. Song, chap. iii. G. 
Job, chap. ix. 6 ; chap. xxvi. 11. Psalm lxxv. 3. 1 Timothy, chap, 
iii. 15. Revelation, chap. iii. 12. 

26 



402 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



into the sky, these learned men are by no means agreed. 
Having trampled the pearl into fragments, their attempts to 
combine them into another shape are more amusing than 
successful ; and it is hard to say which of the seven opin- 
ions ascribed to the Bible by Infidel commentators is least 
probable. That opinion, however, will, doubtless, after 
more vigorous and protracted rooting, be discovered and 
greedily swallowed amid grunts of satisfaction; an appro- 
priate reward of such laborious stupidity. 

The absurdities of the Greek philosophers were not 
drawn from the Bible. Had the Greeks read the Bible 
more, they would have preserved the common sense God 
gave them a great deal longer, and would not, while profess- 
ing themselves to be wise, have become such fools as to 
adore blocks and stones, and dream of metal firmaments. 
But they turned away their ears from the truth, and were 
turned unto such fables as Infidels falsely ascribe to the 
Bible, A thousand years before the cycles and epicycles 
of the Ptolemaic astronomy were invented, and before 
learned Greeks had learned to talk nonsense about crystal 
spheres, and trap-doors in the bottom of celestial oceans, 
the writers of the Bible were recording those conversations 
of pious philosophers concerning stars, and clouds, and 
rain, from which Galileo derived the first hints of the 
causes of barometrical phenomena. The origin of rain, its 
proportion to the amount of evaporation, and the mode of 
its distribution by condensation, could not be propounded 
by Humboldt himself with more brevity and perspicuity 
than they are expressed by the Idumean philosopher : " He 
maketh small the drops of water ; they pour down rain ac- 
cording to the vapor thereof, which the clouds do drop and 
distill upon man abundantly. Also, can any understand the 
spreadings of the clouds, or the noise of his tabernacles?"* 



* Job, chap, xxxvi. 27. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



403 



The cause of this rarefaction of cold water is as much a 
mystery to the British Association as it was to Elihu; and 
even were all the mysteries of the electrical tension of va- 
pors disclosed, "the balancings of the clouds" would only 
be more clearly discovered to be, as the Bible declares, " the 
wonderful works of Him who is perfect in wisdom." But 
the gravity of the atmosphere, the comparative density of 
floating water, and its increased density by discharges of 
electricity, were as well known to Job and his friends as 
they are to the wisest of our modern philosophers. "He 
looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole 
heaven, to make weight to air, and regulate ivaters by meas- 
ure, in his making a law for the rain, and a path for the 
lightning of thunder."* Three thousand years before the 
theory of the trade winds was demonstrated, or before 
Maury had discovered the rotation and revolutions of the 
wind-currents, it was written in the Bible, <: The wind gocth 
toward the south, and turneth about to the north. And the 
wind returneth again, according to his circuits"^ 

Thousands of years before Newton, Galileo, and Coper- 
nicus were born, Isaiah was writing about the "orbit of the 
earth," and its insignificance in the eyes of the Creator of 
the host of heaven, J Job was conversing with his friends 
on the inclination of its axis, and its equilibrium in space: 
"He spreadoth out the north over the empty space, and 
hangeth the earth upon nothing."§ 

So far from entertaining the least idea of the waters of 
the atmosphere being contained either on the outside or the 
inside of a metal or solid hemisphere, the writers of the 
Bible never once use, even figuratively, any expression con- 
veying it. On the contrary, the well-known scriptural fig- 

* Job, ohap. xxviii. 24 — literal reading, 
f Ecclesiastes, chap. i. 6. 
J Isaiah, chap, xl, 
§ Job, chap. xxvi. 7. 



404 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



ures for the fountains of the rain, are the soft, elastic, 
leathern waterskins of the east, "the bottles of the clouds," 
or the wide, flowing shawl or upper garment wherein the 
people of the east are accustomed to tie up loose, scatter- 
ing substances.* " He bindeth up the waters in his thick 
cloud, and the cloud is not rent under them." "Who hath 
bound the waters in a garment; " "As a vesture thou shalt 
change them;" or the loose, flowing curtains of a royal 
pavilion; or the extended covering of a tent: "his pavil- 
ion around him were dark waters, and thick clouds of the 
skies; " " the spreadings of the clouds, and the noise of his 
tabernacle;" "he spread a cloud for a covering."f In- 
stead of the notion of a single ocean, the " number of the 
clouds " is proverbial in the Scriptures J for a multitude; 
and in direct opposition to the permanence of a vast metal- 
lic arch, the chosen emblems of instability and transitori- 
ness, and of the utmost rapidity of motion, suitable even 
for the chariot of Jehovah, are selected from the heavens. § 
In short, there is not the slighest vestige of any founda- 
tion in Scripture for the notions long afterward introduced 
by the Greek philosophers. Yet Christians, who have read 
these passages of Scripture over and over again, allow them- 
selves to give heed to Infidels, who have not, asserting, with- 
out the shadow of proof, that Moses taught absurdities 
which were not invented for a thousand years after his 
death. The Bible gives hints of many profound scientific 
truths; it teaches no absurdities; and, instead of counte- 
nancing the notion that the sky is a solid metal hemisphere, 

* Euth, chap. iii. 15. 

t Job, chap, xxxviii, 37; chap. xxvi. 8; chap, xxxviii. 9; ehap^ 
xxxvi. 29. Psalm cv. 39; Ixxvii. 17. 

% Isaiah, chap. xliv. 22, Jeremiah, chap. iv. 13. Job, chap, 
xxxviii. 37. Proverbs, chap. xxx. 4, 

I Ecclesiastes, chap, xi, 4. Psalm civ. 3, Matthew, chap. xxiv. 30. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



405 



it teaches, Loth literally and figuratively, directly the con- 
trary. 

4. We come now to the fourth objection, that the Bible 
represents God as creating light before the sun, which is 
supposed to be an absurdity, and as creating the sun, moon, 
and stars only two days before Adam. This is the only 
astronomical objection to the Bible account of creation 
which has any foundation of Scripture statement to rest 
upon ; but we shall soon see that here, also, Infidels have 
not done themselves the justice of reading the Bible with 
attention. 

I have already corrected that confusion of ideas and care- 
lessness of perusal which confounds the two distinct and 
different words, create and make, so as to make both mean 
the same thing. God created the heavens, as well as the 
earth, in the beginning ; a period of such remote antiquity 
that, in Bible language, it stands next to eternity. The 
sun and moon then came into being. Through what changes 
they passed, or when they were eudowed with the power of 
giving light to the universe, the Bible nowhere declares; 
but on the fourth day, it tells us, they were made lights, or, 
literally, light-bearers, to this earth. The comparatively in- 
significant place allotted to the stars, in the narrative of 
this earth's formation, corresponds, with the strictest pro- 
priety, to the nature of the discourse ; which is not an ac- 
count of the system of the universe, but of the process of 
preparation of this earth for the abode of man. Compared 
with the influences of "the two great light-bearers," those 
of the stars are very insignificant; since the sun sheds 
more light and heat on the earth in one day, than all the 
fixed stars have done since the creation of Adam. It is 
evident, from the words, that Moses is not speaking either 
of their original creation, or of their actual magnitude, but 
of their appointment and use in relation to us, when he 
says, "And (rod made two great lighjb-bearers (the greater 



406 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



light-bearer to rule the day, and the lesser light bearer to 
rule the night), and the stars. And God set them in the 
firmament of the heavens, to give light upon the earth, and 
to rule over the day and the night, and to divide the light 
from the darkness." 

Neither here nor elsewhere does he say they were created 
at this time, but in all the subsequent references uses other 
words, such as "prepared," "divided," "made," "appro- 
priated," "made for ruling," "gave; " a studious omission, 
which shows that the Author of the Bible had not forgotten 
how long it was since he had called them into being. The 
Bible, then, does not say that God created the sun and stars 
only two days before Adam. 

Another correction of careless Bible reading is necessary, 
that we may be satisfied about what the Bible does not say, 
ere we begin to defend what it does say. The Bible does 
not say, nor lead us to believe, that the darkness spoken of 
in the second verse of the first of Genesis had existed from 
eternity. Darkness is not eternal; it requires the exercise 
of creative power for its production. Light is the eternal 
dwelling of the Word of God.* The darkness which 
brooded over our earth, at the period of its formation, is very 
plainly described in the Bible as a temporary phenomenon, 
incident to, and necessary for, the birth of ocean. It is 
confined by the adverb of time, when, to the. period of con- 
densation, upheaval, and subsidence, occupied by the birth 
of that gigantic infant, "when it burst forth as though it 
had issued from the womb; when I made the cloud a gar- 
ment for it, and thick darkness a swaddling band for it, and 
broke up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors."f 
The sun may have shone for millions of years before upon 
the earth, or might have been shining with all his brilliance 

* Isaiah, chap. xlv. 7. 1 John, chap. i. 5. Daniel, chap. ii. 22. 
1 Timothy, chap. vi. 16. 
f Job, chap, xxxviii. 9, 10. Literally, In my making, etc. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



407 



at that very time, while not a single ray penetrated the 
thick darkness of the vapors in which earth was clothed. 
But whether or not, darkness must, from its very nature, 
be limited, both in space and time. To speak of infinite 
and eternal darkness is as unscriptural as it is absurd. The 
source of light is Uncreated and Eternal .* 

Further — if my readers are not tired with these perpet- 
ual corrections of careless reading and mistaken meaning — 
the light called into existence in the third verse of the first 
chapter of Genesis is as evidently a different word from the 
two lights spoken of in the fourteenth verse, as the singular 
is different from the plural ; and the thing signified by it 
is as distinct from the things spoken of in the fourteenth 
verse, as the abstract is from the concrete ; as, when I say 
of the first, "light travels 195,000 miles per second," but 
mean a totally distinct subject when I say, " Extinguish the 
lights." The Hebrew words are even more palpably differ- 
ent, the word for light, in the third verse, being aur, while 
the words for the light*, in the fourth day's work, are 
maurt and at cmaur • words as distinct in shape and sense 
as our English words, light and the lighthouses. 

The locality of the light of the third verse is, moreover, 
wholly different from that of the light-bearers of the four- 
teenth verse. That was placed on earth — these in heaven. 
It was of the earth alone the writer was speaking, in the 
second verse; the earth alone is the subject of the follow- 
ing verses. It was the darkness of earth that needed to 
be illuminated ; but there is not the remotest hint, in any 
portion of Scripture, that any other planet or star was 
shrouded in gloom at this time. But, on the contrary, we 
are most distinctly informed that the wonders which God 
was performing in this world at that very time were dis- 
tinctly visible amid the cheerful illumination of other orbs, 



* Revelation, chap. xxi. 23; chap. xxii. 5. Isaiah, chap. lx. 10. 



408 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



" when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of 
God shouted for joy,"* as this earth emerged from its tem- 
porary darkness It was not from the light of heaven, but 
out of this darkness of earth, that Grod, who stiM draws the 
lightning's flash from the black thunder-cloud, commanded 
the light to shine. f And it was upon this earth, and not 
throughout the universe, that it produced alternate day and 
night. To extend this command for the illumination of the 
darkened earth, so as to mean the production of light in 
general, and the lighting of the most distant telescopic, and 
even invisible stars — which are neither specified in the com- 
mand itself, nor by any necessity of language or Scripture 
implied in it, but, on the contrary, excluded, by the express 
Scripture declarations of the pre-existence of light, and of 
morning stars — is an outrage alike against all canons of 
criticism, laws of grammar, and dictates of common sense. 
The command, " Let there be light," had respect to this 
earth only. 

The Bible does represent this earth as illuminated at a 
time when the sun was not visible from its surface — perhaps 
not visible at all. Now, if any one will undertake to scoff 
at the Bible for speaking of light without sunshine, or of 
the sun shining upon a dark earth — as Infidels abundantly 
do — we demand that he tell us, What is light, and how is 
it connected with the sun? If he can not, let him cease to-' 
scoff at matters too high for him. 

If he can tell us, he knows that the retardation of Encke's 
comet, which every year falls nearer and nearer the sun, has 
discovered the existence of an attenuated ether in the ex- 
panse or firmament; and that the experiments of Arago on' 
the polarization of light have finally demonstrated that our 
sensation of light is exerted by a series of vibrations or 



* Job, chap, xxxviii. 7. 

f 2 Corinthians, chap. iv. 6. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



409 



undulations of this fluid, * he will then be able to per- 
ceive the propriety with which the Author of light and of 
the Bible speaks, not of creating light, as if it were a ma- 
terial substance, but of forming or commanding its display. 
xVnd he will be better able to comprehend the beauty and 
scientific propriety with which he selected the active parti- 
ciple of the verb to flow, as the name for the undulations 
of this fluid ; for the primary meaning of the Hebrew verb 
ar is, to flow, or, when used as a noun, a flood. " Tt shall 
be cast out and drowned, as by the flood of Egypt/' j- And 
of the like import are the nouns, iar and aur, formed from 
it. " Who is this that covereth up like a flood, whose 
waters are moved like the rivers? "J The philosopher, even 
though he be a skeptic, will cease to mock the Bible when 
he reads there, that 6000 years ago its Author termed light 
the flovring — the undulation. " In the words of the 1 Son of 
Grod,' and the ' Son of Man,' no less than in his works, with 
all their adaptation to the circumstances of the times and 
persons to whom they were originally delivered, are things 
inexplicable — concealed germs of an infinite development, 
reserved for future ages to unfold. "§ To the man of learn- 
ing and reflection, this progressive fullness, and unfathom- 
able depth of the Scripture, is a most conclusive proof that 
it was dictated by Him in whom are hid all the treasures of 
wisdom and knowledge. 

But the ignorant scoffers — the great majority — will mock 
on, and speak evil of the things they know not. Their 
mockery is founded on two assumptions, which they believe 
to be irrefutable ; that the sun is the only possible source 
of light to the earth ; and that it is impossible for the sun 

* Somerville's Connection of the Physical Sciences, Sec. 19-23. 
t Amos, chap. viii. 8. 

% Jeremiah, chap. xlvi. 7. Genesis, chap. xli. 1-18. See Park- 
hurst's Hebrew Lexicon, sub voce, 
g Neander. 



410 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



to exist without illuminating the earth. Unless they can 
prove both of these assumptions to be true, they can not 
prove the Bible account of creation to be false, nor even 
show it to be impossible. Neither of these assumptions can 
possibly be proved true ; for none of them can explore the 
universe, to discover the sources of light, nor put the sun 
through every possible experiment, to discover that his light 
is an inseparable quality. The only thing Infidels can truly 
allege against the Bible account of the origin of light is, 
their ignorance of the process. The argument is simply 
this : " God could not cause light without sunshine, because 
I don't know hoic he did it. Nor can I understand how 
the sun shone on a dark earth; therefore, it is impossible.'' 

These arguments from ignorance need no other answer 
than the questions, Do you know how the sun shines at all ? 
Is your ignorance the measure of God's wisdom ? 

But I shall demonstrate the utter falsehood of both these 
assumptions, by showing the actual existence of many 
sources of light besides the sun, and the perfect possibility 
of the existence of the sun without sunshine, and of sun- 
shine without any light reaching the earth. Thus, both the 
alleged impossibilities upon which the argument against the 
truth of the Bible is based will be removed, and the gross 
ignorance of natural science displayed by professedly scien- 
tific scoffers at the Bible exposed. 

Light, so far from being solely derived from the sun, ex- 
ists in, and can be educed from, almost any known substance. 
Even children are familiar with the light produced by the 
friction of two pieces of quartz ; and no one needs to be 
informed how light may be produced by the combustion of 
inflammable substances. But the number of these sub- 
stances is far greater than is generally supposed, and light 
can be produced by processes to which we do not generally 
apply the idea of burning. Besins, wool, silks, wood, and 
all kinds of earths and alkalies, are capable of emitting 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



411 



light in suitable electrical conditions ; so that the surface of 
our earth may have been a source of light in pasf ages, as 
it even now is,* near the poles and the equator, flashing its 
Aurora Borealis and Aurora Australis, and sending out its 
belts of Zodiacal light, f far into the surrounding darkness. 

Schubert, quoted by Kurtz, says: "May not that polar 
light, which is called the Aurora of the North, be the last 
glittering light of a departed age of the world, in which 
the earth was inclosed in an expanse of aerial fluid, from 
which, through the agency of electric magnetic forces, 
streamed forth an incomparably greater degree of light, 
accompanied with animating warmth, almost in a similar 
mode to what still occurs in the luminous atmosphere of 
our sun ? " 

Again, the metallic bases of all the earths are highly in- 
flammable. A brilliant flame can be produced by the com- 
bustion of water. All the metals can be made to flash 
forth lightnings, under suitable electric and magnetic ex- 
citements. The crystals of several rocks give out light 
during the process of crystallization. Thousands of miles 
of the earth's surface must once have presented the lurid 
glow of a vast furnace full of igneous rocks. Even now, 
the copper color of the moon during an eclipse shows us 
that the earth is a source of light. J The mountains on the 
surface of Venus and the moon, and the continents and 
oceans of Mars, attest the existence of upheaval and sub- 
sidence, and of volcanic fires, capable of producing such 
phenomena, and of course of sources of light in those plan- 
ets, such as exist on the earth. We know, then, most cer- 
tainly, that there are many other bodies capable of produc- 
ing light besides the sun. That God could command the 

* Cosmos, Vol. I. p. 196. 

f Annual of Scientific Discovery. 1856. 

% Gosmos, Vol. I. p. 196. Nicholl's Solar System, 184. 



412 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



light to shine out of darkness, and convert the very ocean 
into a magnificent illumination, the following facts clearly 
prove. " Capt. Bonny castle, coming up the Gulf of St. 
Lawrence, on the seventh of September, 1826, was roused 
by the mate of the vessel, in great alarm, from an unusual 
appearance. It was a starlight night, when suddenly the 
sky became overcast, in the direction of the high land of 
Cornwallis County, and an instantaneous and intensely vivid 
light, resembling the Aurora, shot out of the hitherto gloomy 
and dark sea, on the lee bow, which was so brilliant that 
it lighted everything distinctly, even to the mast-head. The 
light spread over the whole sea, between the two shores, and 
the waves, which before had been tranquil, now began to be 
agitated. Capt. Bonnycastle describes the scene as that of a 
blazing sheet of awful and most brilliant light. A long and 
vivid line of light, superior in brightness to the parts of the 
sea not immediately near the vessel, showed the base of the 
high, frowning, and dark land abreast ; the sky became lower- 
ing, and more intensely obscure. Long tortuous lines of light 
showed immense numbers of large fish, darting about as if 
in consternation. The topsail yard and mizzen boom were 
lighted by the glare, as if gas-lights had been burning di- 
rectly below them ; and until just before daybreak, at four 
o'clock, the most minute objects were distinctly visible."* 
The other assumption, that the sun could not possibly 
have existed without giving light to the earth, is contra- 
dicted by the most familiar facts. The earth and each of 
the planets might have been, and most probably were, sur- 
rounded by a dense atmosphere, through which the sun's 
rays could not penetrate. It is not at all necessary to prove 
that such was the fact. I am only concerned to prove the 
possibility ; for the Infidel's objection is founded on the 
presumed impossibility of the coexistence of a dark earth 



* Somerville's Connection of Physical Sciences, 288. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



413 



and a shining sun. Any person who has ever been in 
Pittsburg, Glasgow, or the manufacturing districts of En- 
gland, and has seen how the smoke of even a hundred fac- 
tory chimneys will shroud the heavens, can easily compre- 
hend how a similar discharge, on a larger scale, from the 
thousands of primeval volcanoes,* would cover the earth 
with the pall of darkness. By the eruption of a single 
volcano, in the island of Sumbawa, in 1815, the air was 
filled with ashes, from Java to Celebes, darkening an area 
of more than 200,000 square miles ; and the darkness was 
so profound in Java, three hundred miles distant from the 
volcano, that nothing equal to it was ever witnessed in the 
darkest night. f Those who have witnessed the fogs raised 
on the Banks of Newfoundland, in the Gulf of St. Law- 
rence, and in the Bay of San Francisco, by the mingling of 
currents of water of slightly different temperatures, can be 
at no loss to conceive the density of the vapors produced 
by the boiling of the sea around and over the multitude of 
volcanoes^." which have produced the countless atolls of the 
Pacific, and by the vast upheavals of thousands of miles of 
heated rocks of the primary formations into the beds of 
primeval oceans. While such processes were in progress, 
it was impossible but that darkness should be upon the face 
of the deep.>5 Even now, a slight change of atmospheric 
density and temperature would vail the earth with darkness. 
We see this substantially done every time that God "cover- 
eth the light with clouds, and commandcth it not to shine 
by the cloud that cometh betwixt," although the sun con- 
tinues to shine with all his usual splendor. To understand 
how there may be a day without sunshine, we need only 

* Cosmos, Vol. I. p. 250. 

t Lyell's Principles of Geology, 465. 

X Cosmos, Vol. I. p. 250. 

I Cosmos, Vol. 1. pp. 198, 216. 



414 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



conceive the whole earth temporarily enveloped in the va- 
pors of the nnastronomical atmosphere of Peru, thus de- 
scribed by Humboldt : 

"A thick mist obscures the firmament in this region for 
many months, during the period called tiempo de la garua. 
2sot a planet — not the most brilliant stars of the southern 
hemisphere — are visible. It is frequently almost impossible 
to distinguish the position of the moon. If, by chance, the 
outline of the sun's disc be visible during the day, it appears 
devoid of rays, as if seen through colored glasses. Accord- 
ing to what modern geology has taught us to conjecture 
concerning the ancient history of our atmosphere, its prim- 
itive condition in respect to its mixture and density must 
have been unfavorable to the transmission of light. When 
we consider the numerous processes which, in the primary 
world, may have led to the separation of the solids, fluids, 
and gases around the earth's surface, the thought involunta- 
rily arises, how narrowly the human race escaped being sur- 
rounded with an untransparent atmosphere, which, though 
not greatly prejudicial to some classes of vegetation, would 
yet have completely vailed the whole of the starry canopy. 
All knowledge of the structure of the universe could then 
have been withheld from the inquiring spirit of man."* 
The sun, then, may have shone with all his brilliancy, for 
thousands of years, and a single ray never have penetrated 
the darkness upon the face of the deep. 

But we will go further, and show that so far from light 
being an essential property of suns, it is a very variable 
attribute, and that in several cases suns have ceased, and 
others begun, to shine, before our eyes. 

The fixed stars are self-luminous bodies, similar to our 
sun. only immensely distant from us. Their numbers, mag- 
nitudes, and places, are known and recorded. But new stars 



* Cosmos, Yol. III. p. 139. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



415 



have frequently flashed into view, where none were pre- 
viously seen to exist ; and others have gradually grown dim 
and disappeared, without changing their place ; and a few 
which had disappeared have reappeared in the same spot they 
formerly occupied; while others have changed their color 
since the era of astronomical observation. In short, there 
is no permanence in the heavens, any more than on the 
earth ; but a perpetual progress and change is the destiny 
of suns and stars, of which the most conspicuous indication 
is the variability of their powers of giving light, of which 
I shall transcribe a few instances. 

" On the eleventh of November, 1572, as the illustrious 
Danish astronomer, Tycho, was walking through the fields, 
he was astonished to observe a new star in the constellation 
Cassiopea, beaming with a radiance quite unwonted in that 
part of the heavens. Suspecting some delusion about his 
eyes, he went to a group of peasants, to ascertain if they 
saw it, and found them gazing at it with as much astonish- 
ment as himself. He went to his instrument, and fixed its 
place, from which it never after appeared to deviate. For 
some time it increased in brightness — greatly surpassed, 
Sirius in luster, and even Jupiter. It was seen by good 
eyes in the da}^time ; a thing which happens only to V enus,. 
under very favorable circumstances ; and at night it pierced 
through clouds which obscured the rest of the stars. After 
reaching its fullest brightness, it again diminished, passed 
through all degrees of visible magnitude, assuming in suc- 
cession the hues of a dying conflagration, and then finally 
disappeared." "It is impossible to imagine anything more 
tremendous than a conflagration that could be visible at 
such a distance."* 

Astronomers now recognize a class of such Temporary 



* Nicholas Solar System, 188. Connection of Physical Sciences, 
363. 



416 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



Stars, which have appeared from time to time in different 
parts of the heavens, blazing forth with extraordinary lus- 
ter, and after remaining awhile, apparently immovable, have 
died away, and left no trace.* Twenty-one of such appear- 
ances of new suns are on record f 

Still further, many familiar suns have ceased to shine. 
"On a careful re-examination of the heavens, many stars 
are found to be missing."% "There are many well authen- 
ticated cases of the disappearance of old stars, whose places 
had been fixed with a degree of certainty not to be doubted. 
In October, 1781, Sir William Herschel observed a star, 
No. 55 in Flamstead's Catalogue, in the constellation Her- 
cules. In 1790 the same star was observed by the same 
astronomer, but since that time no search has been able to 
detect it. The stars 80 and 81 of the same catalogue, both 
of the fourth magnitude, have likewise disappeared. In 
May, 1828, Sir John Herschel missed the star No. 42, in 
the constellation Virgo, which has never since been seen. 
Examples might be multiplied, but it is unnecessary. "§ 

The demonstration of the variableness of the light-giving 
power of suns is completed by the phenomena of the class 
called Variable Stars; though the best astronomers are 
now agreed that variability, and not uniformity, in the 
emission of light, is the general character of the stars. || 
But the variations which occur before our eyes impress us 
more deeply than those which require centuries for their 
completion. Sir John Herschel has observed, and graphic- 
ally described, one such instance of variation of light. 

" The star Eta Argus has always hitherto been regarded 
as a star of the second magnitude ; and I never had reason 

* Herschel's Outlines, Sec. 827. 

t Cosmos, Yol. VIII. p. 210. 

% Herschel's Outlines, Sec. 832. 

§ Mitchell's Planetary and Stellar Worlds, 294. 

|| Cosmos, Vol. III. p. 253. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



417 



to regard- it as variable In November, 1837, I saw if, as 
, usual. Judge of my surprise to find, on the sixteenth of 
December, that it had suddenly become a star of the first 
magnitude, and almost equal to Rigel. It continued to in- 
crease. Rigel is now not to be compared with it. It ex- 
ceeds Arcturus, and is very near equal to Alpha Centauri, 
being, at the moment I write, the fourth star in the heav- 
ens, in the order of brightness."* It has since passed 
through several variations of luster. Humboldt gives a 
catalogue of twenty-four of such stars, whose variations 
have been recorded. 

"A strange field of speculation is opened by this phenom- 
enon. Here we have a star fitfully variable to an astonish- 
ing extent, and whose fluctuations are spread over centuries, 
apparently in no settled period, and with no regularity of 
progression. What origin can we ascribe to these sudden 
flashes and relapses.'' What conclusions are we to draw as 
to the comfort or habitability of a system depending for its 
supply rof light and heat on such an uncertain source? 
Speculations of this kind can hardly be termed visionary, 
when we consider that, from what has been before said, we 
are compelled to admit a community of nature between the 
fixed stars and our own sun; and when we reflect, that geol- 
ogy testifies to the fact of extensive changes having taken 
place, at epochs of the most remote antiquity, in the cli- 
mate and temperature of our globe ; changes difficult to recon- 
cile with the operation of secondary causes, such as a differ- 
ent distribution of sea and land, but which would find an_ 
easy and natural explanation in a slow variation of the sup- 
ply of light and heat afforded by the sun himself."f "I 
can not otherwise understand alterations of heat and cold 
so extensive as at one period to have clothed high northern 

* Astronomical Observations, 351. 
t Herschel's Outlines, Sec. 830. 
27 



418 DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



latitudes with a more than tropical luxuriance of vegeta- 
tion, and at another to have buried vast tracts of Europe, 
now enjoying a genial climate, and smiling with fertility, 
under a glacier crust of enormous thickness. Such changes 
seem to point to causes more powerful than the mere local 
distribution of land and water can well be supposed to have 
been. In the slow secular variations of our supply of light 
and heat from the sun, which, in the immensity of time, may 
have gone to any extent, and succeeded each other in any 
order, without violating the analogy of sidereal phenomena 
which we know to have taken place, we have a cause, not 
indeed established as a fact, but readily admissible as some- 
thing beyond a bare possibility, fully adequate to the ut- 
most requirements of geology. A change of half a magni- 
tude on the luster of our sun, regarded as a fixed star, 
spread over successive geological epochs — now progressive, 
now receding, now stationary — is what no astronomer would 
now hesitate to admit as a perfectly reasonable and not im- 
probable supposition* 

The most eminent astronomers are perfectly unanimous 
in their deductions from these facts. They regard variabil- 
ity as the general characteristic of suns and stains, our own 
sun not excepted. "We are led," says Humboldt, "by anal- 
ogy to infer, that as the fixed stars universally have not 
merely an apparent, but a real motion of their own, so their 
surfaces or luminous atmospheres are generally subject to 
those changes (in their "light process") which recur, in 
the great majority, in extremely long, and therefore un- 
measured, and probably undeterminable periods, or which, 
in a few, recur without being periodical, as it were, by a 
sudden revolution, either for a longer or a shorter time." 
And he asks, Why should our sun differ from other suns? 

In reference to the extinction of suns, he says: "What 



* Astronomical Observations, 351. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



419 



we no longer see is not necessarily annihilated. It is merely 
the transition of matter into new forms — into combinations 
which are subject to new processes. Dark cosmical bodies 
may, by a renewed process of light, again become luminous/'* 

In confirmation of the fact adduced in support of this 
view, by La Place, "that those stars which have become in- 
visible, after having surpassed Jupiter in brilliancy, have 
not changed their place during the time they continued 
visible," he adds, " The luminous process has simply ceased." 
Bessel assertsf that, "iVo reason exists for considering lu- 
minosity an essential property of these bodies " And Nicholl 
sums up the matter in the following emphatic words: "No 
more is light inherent in the sun than in Tj r cho's vanished 
star; and with it and other orbs, a time may come when, 
through the consent of all the powers of nature, he shall 
cease to be required to shine. The womb which contains 
the future is that which bore the past"^ 

Here, then we behold astronomy presenting to our obser- 
vation facts and processes so similar to those which revela- 
tion presents to our faith, that all those men who are most 
profoundly versed in her lore, reasoning solely from the facts 
of science, and without any reference to the Bible, unani- 
mously conclude that there was such a state of darkness 
and confusion before our era, as the Bible declares — that its 
causes were most probably such as the Bible implies — and 
that the sudden illuminating of dark bodies, and their ex- 
tinction, and even re-illumination, are facts so perfectly well 
authenticated as matters of observation in regard to other 
suns, that no reasonable man can hesitate to believe any 
credible assurance that our sun has passed through such a 
process. With what feelings, then, are we to regard men 

* Cosmos, Vol. III. pp. 222-232. 
t Cosmos, Vol. III. p. 246. 
X Solar System, 190. 



420 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



who, in defiance of the most common facts, and in contra- 
diction to the demonstrations of science, blaspheme the 
God of truth as a teacher of falsehood, because he speaks 
of light distinct from that of the sun? Surely, such men 
are those whom he describes as " having the understanding 
darkened, being alienated from the life of God, through the 
ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their 
hearts. In whom the God of this world hath blinded the 
minds of them that believe not."* 

These facts, of the sudden kindling of stars, their grad- 
ual passage through all the hues of a dying conflagration, 
and their final extinction, and present blackness of dark- 
ness, are facts of fearful omen to the enemies of God. They 
are the original threatenings of Heaven, whence the fearful 
language of Bible warning is derived. They attest its 
truth, and illustrate its import. 

The favorite theory of the unbeliever is the uniformity of 
nature. u Where," says he, "is the promise of Christ's 
coming to judgment ; for since the fathers fell asleep, all 
things continue as they were since the beginning of the 
world?" But the telescope dispels the illusion, exhibits 
the course of nature as a succession of catastrophes, dis- 
plays the conflagration of other worlds, and the extinction 
of their suns, before our eyes, and asks, Why should our 
sun differ from other suns? It is not the preacher, but the 
philosopher, who has turned prophet, when — looking back 
on the period when the Siberian elephant and rhinoceros 
were frozen amid their native jungle, and icebergs visited 
the plains of India — he proclains, u The icomb that bore the 
past contains the future." 

The threatenings of God's Word are invested with a 
mantle of terrible literality by the facts we have been con- 
templating. Raised at the day of resurrection, in these 



* Ephesians, chap. iv. 18. 2 Corinthians, chap. iv. 4. 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE SUNRISE. 



421 



bodies, and with these senses, and this capability of rejoic- 
ing in the light, and shuddering and pining amid outward 
gloom, physical darkness will be the terrible prison of those 
who chose darkness rather than light, because their deeds 
were evil. The Father of Lights shall withdraw his blessed 
Influences from the hearts, the dwellings, the eyes, of those 
who say to him, " Depart from us, for we desire not the 
knowledge of thy ways." The sun shall cease to vivify 
God's corn, and wine, and oil, which ungodly men consume 
upon their lusts. The moon shall cease to shine upon the 
robber's toil, and the stars to illumine the adulterer's path. 
The light of heaven shall cease to gild the field of carnage, 
where men perform the work of hell. In the very midst of 
your worldliness and business, unbeliever, when you are in 
all the engrossment of buying and selling, and planting and 
building, and marrying and giving in marriage, without 
warning or expectation, "the sun shall go down at noon, and 
the stars shall be darkened in the clear day." As in the 
warning and example given to the enemies of the Lord in 
Egypt, thick darkness, that may be felt, shall wind its in- 
evitable chains around you, preventing your escape from the 
judgment of the great day, and giving you a fearful fore- 
taste of that "blackness of darkness for ever" of which 
you are now forewarned in the Word of Truth. 

" The sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give 
her light, 

"And the stars shall fall from the heavens, 
" And the powers of the heavens shall be shaken ; 
"And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in 
the heavens, 

"And then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn; 
"And they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds 
of heaven, 
* "With power and great glory." 

" Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness ; 



422 



DAYLIGHT BEFORE StTNRlSE. 



" There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 

" Hear ye, and give ear ; be not proud, 

" For the Lord hath spoken. 

" Give glory to the Lord, your God, 

" Before he cause darkness, 

" And before your feet stumble upon the dark mountains ; 

"And while ye look for light, 

" He turn it into the shadow of death, 

" And make it gross darkness." 

"I am the light of the world ; 

" He that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, 

2 'But shall have the light of life."* 



* Matthew, chap. xxiv. 29. John, chap. viii. 12. Jeremiah, chap, 
xiii. 15. Matthew, chap. xxii. 13 and chap. xxv. 30. 



CHAPTER XII. 



TELESCOPIC yiEWS OF JScRIPTURE. 



No kind of knowledge is more useful to man than the 
knowledge of his own ignorance; and no instrument has 
done more to give him such knowledge than the telescope. 
Faith is the believing of facts we do not know, upon the 
word of one who does. If any one knows everything, or 
thinks he does, he can have no faith. A deep conviction of 
our own ignorance is, therefore, indispensable to faith. The 
telescope gives us this conviction in two ways. It shows us 
that we see a great many things we do not perceive, tells us 
the size and the distances of those little sparks that adorn 
the sky, and leads us to reason out their true relations to 
our earth. Then it tells us, that what we see is little of 
what is to be seen ; that our knowledge is but a drop from 
the great ocean, a rush-light sparkling in the vast darkness 
of the unknown. It tells us, that we do not see right, and 
that we do not see far ; and that there may be things, both 
in heaven and earth, not dreamed of in our philosophy. 
Further, it confirms the Bible testimony concerning the 
facts of its own province, by removing all improbability 
from some of its most wonderful narratives, attesting the 
accuracy of its language, and confirming, by some of its 
most recent discoveries the truth of its statements. Our 
space will only allow us to select five illustrations of the 
tendency of faith in the telescope, to produce faith in the 
Bible. 

L One of the latest astronomical discoveries throws light 
(423) 



424 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



upon one of the most ancient scientific allusions of the Bi- 
ble, and one which has perplexed both commentators and 
geologists ; that which hints at the second causes of the del- 
uge. Not that it is at all needful for us to be able to tell 
where Grod Almighty procured the water to drown the un- 
godly sinners of the old world, before we believe his word 
that he did so; unless, indeed, somebody has explored the 
universe, and knows that there is not water enough in it for 
that purpose, or that it is so far away that he could not fetch 
it ; for. as to the fact itself, geology assures us that all the 
dry land on earth has been drowned, not only once, but 
many times. It is not the province of the commentator, 
but of the geologist, to account for the phenomenon. 

Several solutions of the difficulty of finding water enough 
for the purpose have been proposed. One of these sup- 
poses that some of the internal caverns of the earth are 
filled with water, which, when heated by neighboring vol- 
canic fires, would expand one twenty-third of its bulk, and 
flow out, and raise the ocean. "When the volcanic fire was 
burnt out, and the water cooled, it would of course con- 
tract to its former dimensions, and the ocean recede. These 
caverns they suppose to be meant by u the fountains of the 
great deep," in Genesis vii. 11. 

But the Bible describes another, and plainly a very impor- 
tant source of the waters of the deluge, in the rain which fell 
for forty days and forty nights. At present, all the water in 
our atmosphere comes from the sea, by evaporation ; and the 
quantity is too insignificant to cover the globe to any con- 
siderable depth. Divines and philosophers were perplexed 
to give any adequate explanation of this language, and con- 
sidered it simply as Noah's description of the appearance of 
things as viewed from the ark, rather than an accurate ex- 
planation of the actual causes of the deluge. Now, it is 
certainly true, that the Bible does describe things as they 
appear to men. It is, however, beginning to be discovered, 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



425 



that these popular appearances are closely connected with 
philosophical reality. Our purblind astronomy and prat- 
tling geology may be as inadequate to expound the myste- 
ries of the Bible philosophy as was the incoherent science of 
Strabo and Ptolemy. The experience of another planet, 
now transacting before our eyes, admonishes us not to limit 
the resources of Omnipotence by our narrow experience, or 
to suppose that our young science has catalogued all the 
weapons in the arsenal of the Almighty. 

The planet Saturn is surrounded by a revolving belt, con- 
sisting of several distinct rings, containing an area a hun- 
dred and forty-six times greater than the surface of our 
globe, with a thickness of a hundred miles. From mechan- 
ical considerations it had been proved, that these rings could 
not be of a uniform thickness all around, else when a major- 
ity of his seven moons were on the same side, the attraction 
would draw them in upon him, on the opposite side; and 
once attracted to his surface, they could never get loose 
again, if they were solid. * It was next ascertained that 
the motions of the moons and of the rings were such, that 
if the inequality was always in the same place, the same re- 
sult must follow; so that the ring must be capable of chang- 
ing its thickness, according to circumstances. It must be 
either composed of an immense number of small solid bod- 
ies, capable of shifting freely about among themselves, or 
else be fluid. Finally, it has been demonstrated that this 
last is the fact ; that the density of this celestial ocean is 
nearly that of water ; and that the inner portion, at least, 
is so transparent, that the planet has been seen through it.f 
" The ring of Saturn is, then, a stream or streams of fluid, 
rather denser than water, flowing about the primary. "J The 
extraordinary fact, which shows us how God can deluge a 

* Kendall's Uranography, 268. 

t Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1856, p. 380. 

t Ibid. 1852, p. 376. 



426 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OE SCRIPTURE. 



planet when he pleases, I give not in the words of a divine, 
but of a philosopher, whose thoughtless illustration of 
Scripture is all the more valuable, that it is evidently un- 
intentional. 

"M Otto Struve, Mr. Bond, and Sir David Brewster, are 
agreed that Saturn's third ring is fluid, that this is not of 
very recent formation, and that it is not subject to rapid 
change. And they have come to the extraordinary conclu- 
sion, that the inner border of the ring has, since the day of 
Huygens, been gradually approaching to the body of Saturn, 
and that we may expect, sooner or later — perhaps in some 
dozen years — to see the rings united with the body of the 
planet. With this deluge impending, Saturn would scarcely 
he a very eligible residence for men, whatever it might be for 
dolphins."* 

Knowing, as we most certainly do, that the fluid envelopes 
of our own planet were once exceedingly different from the 
present,f here is a possibility quite sufficient to stop the 
mouth of the scoffer. Let him show that God did not, or 
prove that he could not, suspend a similar series of oceans 
over the earth, or cease to pronounce a universal deluge im- 
possible. 

2. That sublime ode, in which Deborah describes the stars 
in their courses as fighting against Sisera J has been rescued 
from the grasp of modern scoffers, by the progress of as- 
tronomy. It has been alleged as lending its support to the 
delusions of judicial astrology; by one class desiring to 
damage the Bible as a teacher of superstition, and by another 
to help their trade. The Bible reader will doubtless be 
greatly surprised to hear it asserted, that the Bible lends 
its sanction to this antiquated, and, as he thinks, exploded 
superstition. He knows how expressly the Bible forbids 

* Ibid. 1856, p. 377. 

t Cosmos, Vol. I. pp. 198-215, 

% Judges, chap. v. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



427 



Grod's people to have anything to do with it, or with its 
heathenish professors. " Thus saith the Lord, Learn not 
the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs 
of heaven, for the heathen are dismayed at them "* And 
they will be still more surprised to learn, that those who 
object against the Bible, that it ascribes a controlling influ- 
ence to the stars, are firm believers in Reichenbach's dis- 
covery of odyle ; an influence from the heavenly bodies so 
spiritual and powerful, that they imagine it able to govern 
the world, instead of God Almighty.f 

* Jeremiah, chap. x. 

t Some of my readers may deem any notice of such a subject, in 
the nineteenth century, entirely unnecessary; but having lived for 
some years within sight of the dwelling of a woman who publicly 
advertised herself in the newspapers as a professor of astrology, and 
seen the continual flow of troubled minds to the promised light — 
the humble serving-girl stealing up the side entrance, and the 
princely chariot discharging its willing dupes at the door, and roll- 
ing hastily away, to await them at the corner — I know of a cer- 
tainty that folly is not yet dead. There are women, aye, and men 
too, who are above the folly of reading the Bible, but just wise 
enough to pay five dollars for, and spend hours in the study of an 
uncouth astrological picture, representing a collocation of the stars, 
which was never witnessed by any astronomer. There are men 
who would not give way to the superstition of supposing that their 
destiny was regulated by the will of Almighty God, yet who be- 
lieve that every living creature's fate is regulated by the aspect of 
the stars at the hour of his nativity; the same stars always causing 
the same period of life and mode of death; though every day's ex- 
perience testifies the contrary. The same stars presided over the 
birth of the poor soldier, who perished in an instant at Austerlitz; 
of his imperial master, who pined for years in St. Helena; of the 
old gentleman who died in his own bed, of gout; and of the batch 
of puppies, whereof old Towser was the only surviving representa- 
tive, the other nine having found their fate in the horse-pond, in 
defiance of the controlling stars. They were all born at the same 
hour, and under the same auspices, and destined to the same fate, 
by the laws of astrology. Yet half a dozen professors of astrology 
find patrons enough in each of our great cities to enable them to 
live and to pay for advertising in the daily papers. 



428 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



The passage thus variously abused is a description, in 
highly poetic strains, of the battle between the troops of 
Israel and those of Sisera ; of the defeat of the latter, and 
of an earthquake and tempest, which completed the de- 
struction of his exhausted troops. The glory of the victory 
is wholly ascribed to the Lord God of Israel ; while the 
rain, the thunder, lightning, swollen river, and " the stars in 
their courses," are all described, in their subordinate places, 
as only his instruments — the weapons of his arsenal. 
" Lord, when thou wentest out of Seir, 
" When thou marchedst out of the field of Edom, 
" The earth trembled, and the heavens dopped, 
" The clouds also dropped down water ; 
" The mountains also melted from before the Lord, 
" Even that Sinai, from before the Lord God of Israel." 
Then, after describing the battle, she alludes to the ce- 
lestial artillery, and to the effects of the storm in swelling 
the river, and sweeping away the fugitives who had sought 
the fords : / 
" They fought from heaven ; 

" The stars in their courses fought against Sisera ; 

" The river Kishon swept them away ; 

" That ancient river, the river Kishon."* 

After describing some further particulars, the hymn con- 
cludes with an allusion to the clearing away of the tempest 
and the appearance of the unclouded sun over the field of 
victory : 

" So let all thine enemies perish, O Lord ; 

" But let them that love thee be as the sun, when he 
goeth forth in his might." 

Where is there the least allusion here to any controlling 
influence of the stars ? You might just as well say, " The 
Bible ascribes a controlling influence over the destinies of 



* Judges, chap. v. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OP SCRIPTURE. 429 



men, to the river Kishon ; " for they are both spoken of, in 
t»he same language, as instruments in Grod's hand for the 
destruction of his enemies. 

But it is objected, " Even by this explanation you have 
the Bible representing the stars as causing the rain." Not 
so fast. If a man were very ignorant, and had never heard 
of anything falling from the sky but rain, he might think 
so. And if the Bible did attribute to the stars some such 
influence over the vapors of the atmosphere, as experience 
shows the moon to possess over the ocean, are you able to 
demonstrate its absurdity? 

Deborah, however, when she sang of the stars in their 
courses fighting against Sisera, was describing a phenomenon 
very different from a fall of rain — was, in fact, describing a 
fall of aerolites upon the army of Sisera. Multitudes of 
stones have fallen from the sky, and not less than five hun- 
dred such falls are recorded. 

"On September 1, 1814, a few minutes before midday, 
while the sky was perfectly serene, a violent detonation was 
heard in the department of the Lot and Garonne. This was 
followed by three or four others, and finally by a rolling 
noise, at first resembling a discharge of musketry, afterward 
the rumbling of carriages, and lastly that of a large build- 
ing falling down. Stones were immediately after precipi- 
tated to the ground, some of which weighed eighteen 
pounds, and sunk into a compact soil, to the depth of eight 
or nine inches; and one of them rebounded three or four 
feet from the ground." 

"A great shower of stones fell at Barbatan, near Roque- 
fort, in the vicinity of Bordeaux, on July 24, 1790. A 
mass fifteen inches in diameter penetrated a hut and killed 
a herdsman and bullock. Some of the stones weighed 
twenty-five pounds, and others thirty pounds." 

"In July, 1810, a large ball of fire fell from the clouds, 



430 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OP SCRIPTURE. 



at Shahabad, which burned five villages, destroyed the 
crops, and killed several men and women."* 

Astronomers are perfectly agreed as to the character of 
these masses, and the source whence they come. "It ap- 
pears from recent astronomical observations that the sun 
numbers among his attendants not only planets, asteroids, \ 
and comets, but also immense multitudes of meteoric stones, \ 
and shooting stars. "f iErolites are, then, really stars. 
They are composed of materials similar to those of our 
earth ; the only other star whose materials we can compare 
with them. They have a proper motion around the sun, in 
orbits distinct from that of the earth. They are capable of 
emitting the most brilliant light, in favorable circumstances. 
Some of them are as large as the asteroids. One, of 600,- 
000 tons weight, passed within twenty-five miles of the 
earth, at the rate of twenty miles a second. A fragment of 
it reached the earth. J " That aerolites were called stars by 
the ancients is indisputable. Indeed, Anaxagoras con- 
sidered the stars to be only stony masses, torn from the 
earth by the violence of rotation. Democritus tells us, that 
invisible dark masses of stone move with the visible stars, 
and remain on that account unknown, but sometimes fall 
upon the earth, and are extinguished, as happened with the 
stony star which fell near Aegos Potamos."§ 

When Deborah, therefore, describes the stars in their 
courses as fighting against Sisera, it is an utterly unfounded 
assumption to suppose that she has any allusion to the base- 
less fancies of an astrology everywhere condemned by the 
religion she professed, when a simple and natural explana- 

* Dick's Celestial Scenery, p. 57, Applegate's edition, where many 
such instances are related. 

■f Vaughn's Report to the American Association for the Advance- 
ment of Science, in Annual of Scientific Discovery for 1855, p. 364. 

t Somerville's Connection of the Physical Sciences, 382. 

I Cosmos, Vol. I. p. 122; Vol. IV. p. 569. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



431 



tion is afforded by the fact, that stars do fall from the heav- 
ens to the earth, and that they do so in their courses, and 
just by reason of their orbital motion; and that the ancients 
both knew the fact, and gave the right name to those bod- 
ies. Let no reasonable man delude himself with the notion 
that God has no weapons more formidable than the dotings 
of astrology, till he has taken a view of the arsenals of 
God's artillery, which he has treasured up against the day 
of battle and of war. 

Here it may be well to notice the illustration which the 
remarkable showers of meteors, particularly those of Novem- 
ber, 1833, shed upon several much ridiculed texts of Scripture. 
Scientific observation has fully confirmed and illustrated the 
scientific accuracy of the Bible in such expressions as, "the 
stars shall fall from heaven;" "there fell a great star from 
heaven, burning as it were a lamp ; " " and the stars of heaven 
fell unto the earth, even as a fig-tree casteth her untimely figs, 
when she is shaken of a mighty wind." Whatever political or 
ecclesiastical events these symbols may signify, there can be 
no question, now, that the astronomical phenomenon used 
to prefigure them is correctly described in the Bible. Most 
of my readers have seen some of these remarkable exhibi- 
tions ; but for the sake of those who have not, I give a brief 
account of one. "By much the most splendid meteoric 
shower on record, began at nine o'clock, on the evening of 
the twelfth of November, 1833, and lasted till sunrise next 
morning. It extended from Niagara, and the northern 
lakes of America, to the south of Jamaica, and from 61° 
of longitude, in the Atlantic, to 100° of longitude in Cen- 
tral Mexico. Shooting stars and meteors of the apparent 
size of Jupiter, Venus, and even the full moon, darted in 
myriads toward the horizon, as if every star in the heavens 
had darted from their spheres " They are described as 
having been as frequent as the flakes of snow in a snow-storm, 



432 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



and to have been seen with equal brilliancy over the greater 
part of the continent of North America.* 

The source -whence these meteors proceed is distinctly 
ascertained to be, as was already remarked with regard to 
the aerolites, a belt of small planetoids, revolving around the 
sun in a little less than a year, and in an orbit intersecting 
that of the earth, at such an angle, that every thirty-three 
years, or thereabouts, the earth meets the full tide on the 
twelfth of November. These meteors are true and proper 
stars. "All the observations made during the year 1853 
agree with those of previous years, and confirm what may 
be regarded as sufficiently well established: the cosmical 
origin of shooting stars. "f 

3. The language of the Bible with respect to the circuit 
of the sun is found to have anticipated one of the most sub- 
lime discoveries of modern astronomy. True to the reality, 
as well as to the appearance of things, it is scientifically 
correct, without becoming popularly unintelligible. 

There is a class of aspirants to gentility who refuse to 
recognize any person not dressed in the style which they 
suppose to be fashionable among the higher classes. A 
Glasgow butcher's wife, in the Highlands, attired in all the 
magnificence of her satins, laces, and jewelry, returned the 
courteous salute of the little woman in the gingham dress 
and gray shawl with a contemptuous toss of the head, and 
flounced past, to learn, to her great mortification, that she 
had missed an opportunity of forming an acquaintance with 
the Queen. So a large class of pretenders to science refuse 
to become acquainted with Bible truth, because it is not 
shrouded in the technicalities of science, but displays itself 
in the plain speech of the common people to whom it was 
given. They will have it, that because its author used com- 
mon language, it was because he could not afford any other ; 

* Somerville's Connection of the Physical Sciences, 383. 
t Annual of Scientific Discovery, 18-54, p. 361. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



433 



and as lie did not contradict every vulgar error believed by 
the people to whom he spoke, it was because he knew no 
better; and because the Hebrews knew nothing of modern 
discoveries in astronomy, geology, and the other sciences, 
and the Bible does not contain lectures on these subjects, 
the God of the Hebrews must have been equally ignorant, 
and the Bible consequently beneath the notice of a philoso- 
pher. 

You will hear such persons most pertinaciously assert, 
that Moses believed all the absurdities of the Ptolemaic 
astronomy; that the earth is the immovable center, around 
which revolve the crystal sphere of the firmament, and the 
sun, and moon, and stars, which are attached to it, after the 
manner of lamps to a ceiling; and that he, and the world 
generally in his day, had not emerged from the grossest bar- 
barism and ignorance of all matters of natural science. Yet 
these very people will probably tell you, in the same conver- 
sation, of the wonderful astronomical observations made by 
the Egyptians, ten thousand years before the days of Adam! 
So beautiful is the consistency of Infidel science. But 
when you inquire into the source of their knowledge of the 
philosophy of the ancients, you discover that they did not 
draw it from the writings of Moses, of which they betray 
the grossest ignorance, nor of any one who lived within a 
thousand years of Moses' time. Voltaire is their authority 
for all such matters. He transferred to the early Asiatics 
all the absurdities of the later Greek philosophers, and 
would have us believe that Moses, who wrote before these 
Greeks had learned to read, was indebted to them for his 
philosophy. Of the learning of the ancient patriarchs 
Voltaire does not tell them much, for a satisfactory reason. 

Yet it might not have required much learning to infer, 
that the eyes, and ears, and nerves of men who lived ten 
times as long as we can, must have been more perfect than 
ours ; that a man who could observe nature with such eyes, 
28 



434 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



under a sky where Stoddart now sees the ring of Saturn, 
the crescent of Venus, and the moons of Jupiter, with the 
naked eye,* and continue his observations for eight hundred 
years, would certainly acquire a better knowledge of the 
appearance of things than any number of generations of 
short-lived men, called away by death before they have well 
learned how to observe, and able only to leave the shell of 
their discoveries to their successors; that unless we have 
some good reason for believing that the mind of man was 
greatly inferior, before the flood, to what it is now, the an- 
tediluvians must have made a progress in the knowledge of 
the physical sciences, during the three thousand years which 
elapsed from the creation to the deluge, much greater than 
the nations of Europe have effected since they began to 
learn their A, B, C, about the same number of years ago ; 
and that though Noah and his sons might not have preserved 
all the learning of their drowned contemporaries, they would 
still have enough to preserve them from the reproach of ig- 
norance and barbarism ; at least until their sons have suc- 
ceeded in building a larger ship than the ark, or a monu- 
ment equal to the Great Pyramid. The Astronomer Royal 
of Scotlandf has demonstrated, that in this imperishable 
monument, erected four thousand years ago, the builders, 
who took care to keep it alone, of all the buildings of Egypt, 
free from idolatrous images or inscriptions, recorded with 
most laborious care, in multiples of the earth's polar diam- 
eter, a metric system, including linear and liquid measures, 
and a system of weights based on a cubical measure of 
water of uniform temperature; which uniform temperature 
they took the utmost care to preserve. He shows further^ 

* Letter to Herschel, from Oroomiah, in Persia — Annual of 
Scientific Discovery, 1854, p. 367. 

t Life and Work in the Great Pyramid, by Piazzi Smyth, F. R. S., 
LL. D. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



435 



that they were acquainted with the precession of the equi- 
noxes, with the density of the earth, and with the earth's 
distance from the sun; or at least calculated it at what 
proves to be nearly a mean of our discordant calculations; 
and that they were acquainted with problems just beginning 
to attract the attention of the science of Europe. 

When we know that the Chaldeans taught the Egyptians 
the expansive power of steam, and the induction of elec- 
tricity by pointed conductors ; that from the most remote 
antiquity the Chinese were acquainted with decimal frac- 
tions, electro-magnetism, the mariner's compass, and the 
art of making glass; that lenses have been found in the 
ruins of Nineveh, and that an artificial currency was in cir- 
culation in the first cities built after the flood;* that as- 
tronomical observations were made in China, with so much 
accuracy, from the deluge till the days of Yau, B. C. 2357, 
that the necessary intercalations were made for harmonizing 
the solar with the lunar year, and fixing the true period of 
365 J days; and that similar observations were conducted to 
a like result within a few years of the same remote period, 
in Babylon ; — if the reader does not conclude that the world 
may have forgotten as much ancient lore during eighteen 
hundred years of idolatrous barbarism before the coming of 
Christ, as it has learned in the same number since, he will, 
at least, satisfy himself that the ancient patriarchs were not 
ignorant savages. f "Whole nations," says La Place, "have 

* "These tablets (of unbaked clay, with inscriptions, found in 
the tomb* of Ereeh, the city of Nimrod — Genesis, chap. x. 10 — 
and deciphered by Eawlinson) were, in point of fact, the equivalent 
of our bank notes, and prove that a system of artificial currency 
prevailed in Babylon and Persia at an unprecedentedly early age; 
centuries before the introduction of paper and writing. 

Rawlinson, in News of the Churches, February, 1858, p. 50. 

t Wilkinson's Manners and Customs of the Egyptian?, Vol. III. 
p. 106; Cosmos, Vol. I. pp. 173, 182; Chinese Pvepository, Vol. IX. 
p. 573; Williams' Middle Kingdom, Vol. II. p. 147. 



436 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



been swept from the earth, with their languages, arts, and 
sciences, leaving but confused masses of ruins to mark the 
place where mighty cities stood. Their history, with a few 
doubtful traditions, has perished; hut the perfection of their 
astronomical observations marks their high antiquity, fixes 
the periods of their existence, and proves that even at that 
early time they must have made considerable progress in 
science."* The Infidel theory, that the first men were sav- 
ages, is a pure fiction, refuted by every known fact of their 
history. 

That, however, is not the matter under discussion. We 
are not inquiring now, what Moses and the prophets thought, 
but what the Author of the Bible told them to say. The 
scribe writes as his employer dictates " I will put my 
words in thy mouth," said God to Jeremiah. " My tongue 
is as the pen of a ready writer," said David. The prophets 
began, not with ' ; Thus saith Isaiah," but " Thus saith the 
Lord." Unless the Word of God was utterly different from 
all his other works, it must transcend the comprehension of 
man in some respects. The profoundest philosopher is as 
ignorant of the cause of the vegetation of wheat as the 
mower who cuts it down ; but their ignorance of the mys- 
teries of organic force is no reason why the one may not 
harvest, and the other eat and live. Just so God's proph- 
ets conveyed precious mysteries to the Church, of the full 
import of which they themselves were ignorant; even as 
Daniel heard but understood not. The prophets, to whom 
it was revealed, that they did not minister to themselves, 
but to us, inquired and searched diligently into the meaning 
of their own prophecies ; which meaning, nevertheless, con- 
tinued hid for ages and generations j If the prophets of 
the old economy might be ignorant of the privileges of the 



* Somcrville's Connection of Physical Sciences, 82. 

f Daniel, chap. xii. 8. 1 Peter, chap. i. 10. Ephesians, chap. i. 3. 



TELESCOriC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



437 



gospel day, of which they prophesied, at God's dictation, 
they might very well be ignorant, also, of the philosophy of 
creation, and yet write a true account of the facts, from his 
mouth. 

Let us suppose, then, that the ancient Hebrews and their 
prophets were, if not quite as ignorant of natural science 
as modern Infidels are pleased to represent them, yet un- 
acquainted with the discoveries of Herschel and Newton ; 
and, as- a necessary consequence, that their language was 
the adequate medium of conveying their imperfect ideas, 
containing none of the technicalities invented by philoso- 
phers to mark modern scientific discoveries ; and that God 
desired to convey to them some religious instruction, through 
the medium of language; must we suppose it indispens- 
able for this purpose that he should use strange words, and 
scientific phrases, the meaning of which would not be dis- 
covered for thirty-three hundred years? Could not Dr. 
Alexander write a Sabbath-school book, without filling it 
fall of such phrases as "right ascension," "declination," 
"precession of the equinoxes," "radius vector," and the 
like ? Or, if some wiseacre did prepare such a book, would 
it be very useful to children ? Perhaps even we, learned 
philosophers of the nineteenth century, are not out of 
school yet. How many discoveries are yet to be made in 
all the sc iences ; discoveries which will doubtless render 
our fancied perfection as utterly childish to the philosophers 
of a thousand years hence as the astronomy of the Greeks 
seems to us ; and demand the use of technical language, 
which would be as unintelligible to us as our scientific no- 
menclature would have been to Aristotle. If God may not 
use popular speech in speaking to the people of any given 
period, but must needs speak the technical language of per- 
fect science, and if science is now, and always will be, of 
necessity, imperfect, we are led to the sage conclusion, that 



438 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



every revelation from God to man must always be unintel- 
ligible ! 

Does it necessarily follow, that because the Author of the 
Bible uses the common phrases, "sun rising," and "sun 
setting," in a popular treatise upon religion, that therefore 
he was ignorant of the rotation of the earth, and intended 
to teach that the sun revolved around it? He is certainly 
under no more obligation to depart from the common lan- 
guage of mankind, and introduce the technicalities of science 
into such a discourse, than mankind in general, and our ob- 
jectors in particular, are to do the like in their common con- 
versation. Now, I demand to know whether they are aware 
that the earth's rotation on its axis is the cause of day and 
night ? But do you ever hear any of them use such phrases 
as "earth rising," and "earth setting?" But if an Infidel's 
daily use of the phrases, " sun rising" " sun setting" and the 
like, does not prove, either that he is ignorant of the earth's 
rotation as the cause of that appearance, or that he intends 
to deceive the world by those phrases, why may not Al- 
mighty God be as well informed and as honest as the Infi- 
del, though he also condescends to use the common language 
of mankind ? 

Do you ever hear astronomers, in common discourse, use 
any other language? I suppose Lieut. Maury, and Her- 
schel, and Leverrier, and Mitchell, know a little of the 
earth's rotation ; but they, too, use the English tongue very 
much like other people, and speak of sunrise and sunset; 
yet nobody accuses them of believing in the Ptolemaic as- 
tronomy. Hear the immortal Kepler, the discoverer of the 
laws of planetary revolution : " We astronomers do not pur- 
sue this science with the view of altering common language ; 
but we wish to open the gates of truth, without affecting 
the vulgar modes of speech. We say with the common 
people, ' The planets stand still, or go down ; ' 1 the sun rises, 
or sets;' meaning only that so the thing appears to us, al- 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



439 



though it is not truly so, as all astronomers are agreed. 
How much less should we require that the Scriptures of 
divine inspiration, setting aside the common modes of speech, 
should shape their words according to the model of the 
natural sciences, and by employing a dark and inappropriate 
phraseology about things which surpass the comprehension 
of those whom it designs to instruct, perplex the simple 
people of Grod, and thus obstruct its own way toward the 
attainment of the far more exalted end to which it aims." 

It is evident, then, that God not only may, hut must, use 
popular language in addressing the people, in a work not 
professedly scientific ; and tjiat if this popular language be 
scientifically incorrect, such use of it neither implies his 
ignorance nor approval of the error. 

But it may be worthy of inquiry whether this popular 
language of mankind, used in the Bible, be scientifically 
erroneous. If the language be intended to express an ab- 
solute reality, no doubt it is erroneous to say the sun rises 
and sets; but if it be only intended to describe an appear- 
ance, and the words themselves declare that intention, it 
can not be shown to be false to the fact. Now, when the 
matter is critically investigated, these phrases are found to 
be far more accurate than those of "earth rising," and 
"earth setting," which Infidels say the Author of the Bible 
should have used. For, as up and down have no existence 
in nature, save with reference to a spectator, and as the 
earth is always down with respect to a spectator on its sur- 
face, neither rising toward him, nor sinking from him, in 
reality, nor appearing to do so, unless in an earthquake, 
the improved phrases are false, both to the appearance of 
things, and to the cause of it. Whereas, our common 
speech, making no pretensions to describe the causes of ap- 
pearances, can not contradict any scientific discovery of 
these causes, and therefore can not be false to the fact; 
while it truly describes all that it pretends to describe — the 



440 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



appearance of things to our senses. And so, after all the 
outcry raised against it by sciolists, the vulgar speech of 
mankind, used by the Author of the Bible, must be allowed 
to be philosophical enough for his purpose, and theirs; at 
least till somebody favors both with a better. 

Though we are in no way concerned, then, to prove that 
every poetical figure in Scripture, and every popular illus- 
tration taken from nature, corresponds to the accuracy of 
scientific investigation, before we believe the Bible to be a 
revelation of our duty to Grod and man, yet it may be worth 
while to inquire, further, whether we really find upon its 
sacred pages such crude and egregious scientific errors as In- 
fidels allege. We have seen in the last chapter, that they are 
not able to read even its first chapter without blundering. 
Indeed, they generally boast of their ignorance of its con- 
tents. It is a very good rule to take them at their word, 
and when they quote Scripture, to take it for granted that 
they quote it wrong, unless you know the contrary. The 
first thing for you to do when an Infidel tells you the Bible 
says so and so, is to get the Book, and see whether it does 
or not. You will generally find that he has either mis- 
quoted the words, or mistaken their meaning, from a neg- 
lect of the context; or perhaps has both misquoted and 
mistaken. Then, when you are satisfied of the correct 
meaning of the text, and he tells you that it is contrary to 
the discoveries of science, the next point is to ask him, Mow 
do you know? You will find h!s knowledge of science and 
Scripture about equal. Both these tests should be applied 
to scientific objections to the Bible, as they are all composed 
of equal parts of biblical blunders, and philosophical fal- 
lacies. 

In the objection under consideration, for instance, both 
statements are wrong. The Bible does not represent the 
earth as the immovable center of the universe, or as im- 
movable in space at all. It does not represent' the sun and 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



441 



stars as revolving around it. Nor are the facts of astronomy 
more correctly stated. It is not the Bible, but our objec- 
tor, that is a little behind the age in his knowledge of 
science. 

If we inquire for those texts of Scripture which repre- 
sent the earth as the immovable center of the universe, we 
shall be referred to the figurative language of the Psalms, 
the book of Job, and other poetical parts of Scripture, 
which speak of the "foundations of the earth," "the earth 
being established " "abiding for ever," and the like, when 
the slightest attention to the language would show that it 
is intended to be figurative. The accumulation of metaphors 
and poetical images in some of these passages is beautiful 
and grand in the highest degree; but none, save the most 
stupid reader, would ever dream of interpreting them liter- 
ally. Take, for instance, Psalm civ. 1-6, where, in one line, 
the world is described as God's house, with beams, and 
and chambers, and foundations ; but in the very next line 
the figure is changed, and it is viewed as an infant, covered 
with the deep, as with a garment. 

" Bless, the Lord, my soul. 

" Lord my Grod, thou art very great ; 

" Thou art clothed with honor and majesty : 

" Who coverest thyself with light, as with a garment ; 

" Who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain ; 

" Who layeth the beams of his chambers upon the waters : 

" Who walketh upon the wings of the wind : 

" Who maketh his angels spirits : 

" His ministers a flaming fire : 

" Who laid the foundations of the earth, 

" That it should not be removed for ever. 

" Thou coveredst it with the deep, as with a garment : 

" The waters stood above the mountains." 

But if any one is so gross as to insist on the literality of 
such a passage, and to allege that it teaches the absolute 



442 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



immobility of the earth, let him tell us what sort of im- 
mobility the third verse teaches, and how a building could 
be stable, the beams of whose chambers are laid upon the 
waters — the chosen emblems of instability. " He hath 
founded it upon the seas : he hath established it upon the 
floods," says the same poet, in another Psalm — xxiv 1. 
This, and all other expressions quoted as declaring the im- 
mobility of the earth in space, are clearly proved, both by 
the words used, and the sense of the context, to refer to 
an entirely different idea : namely, its duration in time. 
Thus, Ecclesiastes i. 4, " One generation passeth away, and 
another cometh ; but the earth abideth forever," is mani- 
festly contrasting the duration of earth with the generations 
of short-lived men, and has no reference to motion in space 
at all. 

Again, in Psalm cxix. 89-91, our objectors find another 
Bible declaration of the immobility of the earth in space : 

" For ever, Lord, thy word is settled in heaven ; 

" Thy faithfulness is unto all generations ; 

" Thou hast established the earth, and it abideth. 

" They continue to this day, according to thine ordinances." 

The same permanence is here ascribed to the heavens (to 
which, as our objectors argue, the Bible ascribes a perpetual 
revolution) as to the earth. The next verse explains this 
permanence to be continuance to this day ; durability, not 
immobility. That the word establish does not necessarily 
imply fixture, is evident from its application, in Proverbs 
viii. 28 : " He established the clouds," the most fleeting of 
all things. Nor is the Hebrew word hun (whence our En- 
glish word, cunning), inconsistent with motion; else, the 
Psalmist had not said that " a good man's footsteps are es- 
tablished by the Lord."* "He established my goings." 
Wise arrangement is the idea, not permanent fixture. 



* Psalm xl. 1, and xxxvii. 23, margin. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



443 



The same remarks apply to Psalm xciii. 1 ; xcvi. 10 ; 1 
Chronicles xvi. 30, and many other similar passages. 

" The world is established, that it can not be moved; 

" Thy throne is established of old : 

" Thou art from everlasting." 
Where the establishment, which is contrasted with the im- 
possible removal, and which explains its import, is evidently 
not a local fixing of some material seat, in one place, but 
the everlasting duration of God's authority. The idea is 
not that of position in space, at all, but of continued dura- 
tion. * 

Space does not allow us to quote all the passages which 
refer to this subject; but after an examination of every 
passage in the Bible usually referred to in this connection, 
and of a multitude of others bearing upon it, I have no 
hesitation in saying, that it does not contain a single text 
which asserts or implies the immobility of the earth in 
space. The notion was drawn from the absurdities of the 
Greek philosophy, and the superstitions of popery, but was 
never gathered from the Word of God. 

But it is alleged that other passages of Scripture do 
plainly and unequivocally express the motion of the sun, 
and his course in a circuit ; as, for instance, the Nineteenth 
Psalm : 

" In them he hath set a tabernacle for the sun, 
" Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, 
" And rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. 
" His going forth is from the end of heaven, 
"And his circuit unto the ends of it." 
And again, in the account of Joshua's miracle, in the 
tenth chapter of his book, it is quite evident that the writer 
supposed the sun to be in motion, in the same way as the 
moon, for he commanded them both to stand still: "Sun, 
stand thou still upon Gibeon, and thou moon in the valley 
of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed t 



444 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 

until the people had avenged themselves upon their ene- 
mies." Now, it is said, if the writer had known what he 
was about, he would have known that the sun was already 
standing still, and would have told the earth to stop its ro- 
tation. And if the earth had obeyed the command, we 
should never have heard of the miracle ; for, as the earth 
rotates at the rate of a thousand miles an hour, the concus- 
sion produced by such a stoppage would have projected 
Joshua, and Israelites, and Amorites, beyond the moon, to 
pursue their quarrel among the fixed stars. 

When we hear men of some respectability bring forward 
such stuff, we are constrained to wonder, not merely were 
they ever at school, but if they ever traveled in a railroad 
car, or whether they suppose their hearers to be so ignorant 
of the most common facts as to believe that there is no way 
of bringing a carriage to a stand but by a sudden jerk, or 
that God is more stupid than the brakeman of an express 
train. We will do them the justice, however, to say, that 
they did not invent it, but merely shut their eyes, and 
opened their mouths, and swallowed it for philosophy, be- 
cause they found it in the writings of an Infidel scoffer, and 
of a Neological professor of theology* — an edifying exam- 
ple of Infidel credulity ! 

Let it be noticed, that in neither of these texts, nor in 
any other portion of Scripture, does the Bible say a single 
word about the revolution of the sun round the earth, as the 
common center of the universe ; on which, however, the 
whole stress of the objection is laid. The passages do not 
prove what they are adduced to prove . They speak of the 
sun's motion, and of the sun's orbit, but they do not say that 
the earth is the center of that orbit. These texts, then, do 
not prove the Author of the Bible ignorant of the system 
of the universe. 

* M. Voltaire; M. Cheneviere; Theol. Essays, Vol. I. p. 456. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



445 



The objection is based upon utter ignorance of one of the 
most important and best attested discoveries of modern as- 
tronomy; the grand motion of the sun and solar system 
through the regions of space, and the dependence of the 
rotation of all the orbs composing it, upon that motion. It 
is not the Author of the Bible who is ignorant of the dis- 
coveries of modern astronomy — when he speaks of the orbit 
of the sun, and his race from one end of the heavens to the 
other, and of the need of a miraculous interposition to stop 
his course for a single day — but his correctors, who have 
ventured to decry the statements of a Book which com- 
mands the respect of such astronomers as Herschel and 
Rosse, while ignorant of those elements of astronomy which 
they might have learned from a perusal of the books used 
by their children in our common schools. For the benefit 
of such, however, I will present a brief explanation of the 
grounds upon which astronomers are as universally agreed 
upon the belief of the sun's motion around a center of the 
firmament, as they are upon the belief of the revolution of 
the earth round the sun 

When you are passing in a carriage, at night, through the 
street of a city lighted up by gas-lamps in the streets, and 
lights irregularly dispersed in the windows, or passing in a 
ferry-boat, from one such city to another, at a short dis- 
tance from it, you observe that the lights which you are 
leaving appear to draw closer and closer together, while 
those toward which you are approaching widen out, and 
seem to separate from each other. If the night were per- 
fectly dark, so that you could see nothing but the lights, 
you could certainly know not only that you were in motion, 
but also to what point you were moving, by carefully watch- 
ing their appearances. So, if all the fixed stars were ab- 
solutely fixed, and the sun and planets, including our earth, 
were moving in any direction — say to the north — then the 
stars toward which we were moving would seem to widen 



446 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OP SCRIPTURE. 



out from each other, and those which we were leaving would 
seem to close up ; so that the space which appeared between 
any two stars in the south, in a correct map of the heav- 
ens, a hundred years ago, would be smaller, and that be- 
tween any two stars in the north would be larger, than the 
space between the same stars upon a correct map now. Now, 
such changes in the apparent positions of stars are actually 
observed. The stars do not appear in the same places 
now as they did a hundred years ago. 

The fixed stars, then, are either drifting past our solar 
system, which alone remains fixed; or, the fixed stars are 
all actually at rest, and our sun is drifting through them ; 
or, our solar system and the so-called fixed stars are both 
in motion. One or other of these suppositions must be the 
fact. The first is simply the old Ptolemaic absurdity, only 
transferring the center of the universe to the sun. The 
second is contrary to the observed fact, that multitudes of 
the stars, which were supposed to be fixed, are actually re- 
volving around each other, in systems of double, triple, and 
multiple suns. And both are contrary to the first princi- 
ples of gravitation ; for, as every particle of matter attracts 
every other, directly as the mass, and inversely as the square 
of the distance, if any one particle of matter in the universe 
is in motion, the square of its distance from every other 
particle varies, and its attraction is increased in one direc- 
tion, and diminished in another; and so every particle of 
matter in free space, as far as the force of gravitation ex- 
tends, will be put in motion too. But our earth, and the 
planets, and the double and triple stars, are in motion, and 
the law of gravitation extends to every known part of the 
universe; therefore every known particle of matter in the 
universe is in motion too, our sun included. 

The third supposition, then, is most indisputably true; 
our solar system, and all the heavenly bodies, are in motion. 
To this conclusion all the observed facts conform. The Bi- 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 447 



ble does say that the sun moves, and moves in a curve All 
mathematicians prove that it must of necessity do so. All 
astronomers assert that it does so. The unanimous verdict 
of the scientific world is thus rendered by Nicholl : "As to 
the subject itself, the grand motion of the sun, as well as its 
present direction, must be received now as an established doc- 
trine of astronomy."* But the discovery was anticipated, 
three thousand years ago, by the Author of the Bible. 

But, as will readily be perceived, the difficulty of deter- 
mining either the direction or the rate of this motion is 
immensely increased in this case ; for we are now not like 
persons riding in a carriage, watching the fixed lights in the 
street to determine our direction and rate of progress ; but 
we are watching the lamps of a multitude of carriages, 
moving at various distances, and with various velocities, and, 
for anything we can tell at first sight, in various directions. 
We are on board a steamer, and are watching the lights of 
a multitude of other steamers, also in motion ; and it is not 
easy to find out, in the darkness, how either they or we are 
going. If each were pursuing its own independent course, 
without any common object or destination, the confusion 
would be so great that we could learn nothing of the rate 
or direction either of our own motion or theirs. 

But astronomers are not content to believe that the uni- 
verse is governed by accident. The whole science is based 
upon the assumption, that a presiding mind has impressed 
the stamp of order and regularity upon the whole cosmos. 
They are deeply convinced that God's law extends to all 
God's creation; that all his works display his intelligence, 
as well as his power, and proceed according to a wise plan. 
Having seen that all the stellar motions previously known 
are orderly motions, in circular or elliptical orbits, and that 

•-'Humboldt's Cosmo", Vol. I. p. 139; Herschel's Outlines, 380; 
Kendall's Uranography, 205. 



448 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



the most of the solid bodies belonging to our own system 
revolve in one direction, they reasoned from analogy, that 
this might be the case with the sun and the fixed stars, and 
went to work with great diligence, to see whether it was or 
not; and, by comparing a great multitude of observations, 
ancient and modern, made both in the northern and south- 
ern hemispheres, and on all sorts of stars, they have come 
to the conclusion, that our sun, and all the bodies of the 
solar system, are flying northward, at the rate of three mil- 
lions three hundred and thirty-six thousand geographical 
miles a day — five thousand times faster than a railway ex- 
press train — toward the constellation Hercules, in R. A. 
259° Dec. 35°. 

Further, as the direction of this motion is slowly and 
regularly changing, just as the direction of the head of a 
steamer in wearing, or of a railway train running a curve, it 
is certain that the sun is moving, not in a straight line, but 
in a curve. The revolution of the sun in such an orbit was 
known to the Author of the Bible when he wrote, " his cir- 
cuit is to the end of heaven." The direction of the cir- 
cumference of a circle being known, that of its center can 
be found ; for the radius is always a tangent to the circum- 
ference, and the intersection of two of these radii will be 
the center ; so that, if we certainly knew the sun's orbit to 
be circular, or nearly so, we could calculate the center. But 
as we do not certainly know its form, we can not certainly 
calculate the center ; we can only come near it. And as 
we know that the line which connects the circumference 
with the center of the sun's orbit, runs through the group 
of stars known as the Pleiades, or the Cluster ; and as all 
the stars along that line seem to move in the same direction 
— a different direction from that of the stars in other re- 
gions, just as they must do if they and we were revolving 
around that group — Argelander and others have concluded, 
with a high degree of probability, that the grand center 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



449 



around which the sun and our firmament revolve, is that 
constellation which the Author of the Bible, more than 
three thousand years ago, called kyme — the pivot. 

It would require a greater knowledge of electro-magnet- 
ism than most of my readers possess, to explain the con- 
nection of the earth's rotation with the sun's grand move- 
ment. I will merely state the facts. Electro-magnetism 
is induced by friction. The regions of space are not empty, 
but filled with an ether, whose undulations produce light ; 
and this ether is sufficiently dense to retard the motions of 
comets. The friction, produced by the rapid passage of the 
sun and solar system through this ether, must be immense, 
and is one source of electricity, and the principal source of 
electro- magnetism. This kind of electricity differs from 
the other kinds, in that its action is always at right angles 
to the current, and tends to produce rotation in any wheel, 
cylinder, or sphere, along whose axis it flows* The sun, 
and all the planets, traveling in the direction of their poles, 
the current is of course in the direction of the axis; and 
the result is, that while the sun moves along his grand 
course, he and all the bodies of the system will rotate, by 
the influence of the electro-magnetism generated by that 
motion ; and if he stops, his and their rotation stops too. 
Day and night on earth are produced by the sun's motion 
causing the earth's rotation. You can see the principle 
illustrated by the child who runs along the street with his 
windmill, to create a current, which will make it revolve. 
The Author of the Bible made no mistake when, desiring 
to lengthen the day, he commanded the sun to stand still. 
It is not the Creator, but his correctors, who are ignorant 
of the mechanism of the universe. 

Thus, these long-misunderstood and much-assailed Scrip- 

* Somerville's Connection of the Physical Sciences, 171, 337, 
315; Architecture of the Heavens, 286. 
29 



450 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



tures are not only vindicated, but far more than vindicated, 
by the progress of astronomical discovery. It not only 
proves the language of the Bible to be correct; it assures 
us that it is divine. The same Hand which formed the 
stars to guide the simple peasant to his dwelling, at the 
close of day, and to lead the mighty intellects of Newton 
and of Herschel among the mysteries of the universe, 
formed those expressions which, to the peasant's eye, de- 
scribe the apparent reality, and, to the astronomer's reason, 
demonstrate the reality of the appearance of the heavens, 
and are thus, alike to peasant and philosopher, the oracles 
of God. 

Nor is this the only instance of such Bible oracles. Thou- 
sands of years before philosophers knew anything of the 
formation of dew, Moses described it exactly, and noticed 
how it differed from the rain which drops down, while the 
dew evaporates. "My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my 
speech shall distill as the dew." — Deuteronomy xxxii. 2. 
Solomon described the cycloidal course of the wind, and 
recorded it in Ecclesiastes long before Admiral Fitzroy's 
discovery; as he also anticipated the doctrine of aqueous 
circulation in his pregnant proverb: "Unto the place 
from whence the rivers come, thither they return again." — 
Ecclesiastes i. 7. Job declared the law of pneumatics when 
he declared that " Grod maketh loeight for the winds." Long 
before Madler, the celebrated Russian astronomer, published 
his remarkable opinion: " I regard the Pleiades as the cen- 
tral group to the whole astral system, and the fixed stars, 
even to its outer limits, marked by the Milky Way; and I 
regard Alcyone as that star of all others, composing the 
group which is favored by most of the probabilities as being 
the true central sun of the universe," Moses tells us they 
were known as "the hinge, or pivot," of the heavens; and 
God asks, "Canst thou bind the secret influences of the 
Pleiades?" Though Peter was no geologist, and probably 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



451 



incapable of calculating the ratio of the central heat, he 
tells us that the heavens and the earth are "reserved unto 
fire," literally, "stored with fire." 

Equally in advance of modern medical science, thousands 
of years before our modern discoveries, the Author of the 
Bible declared that "the life is in the blood," and spoke of 
the slow combustion of starvation exactly in the language 
of the most recent physiology, " they shall be burnt with 
hunger, and devoured with burning heat." — Deuteronomy 
xxxii. 24. 

Here we have scientific truth not discovered for centuries 
by our men of science, but revealed by prophets — scientific 
discovery, in advance of science — predictions of the future 
progress of the human intellect, no less than revelations of 
the existing motions of the stars. He who wrote these 
oracles knew that the creatures to whom he gave them 
would one day unfold their hidden meaning (else he had not 
so written them), and, in the light of scientific discovery, 
see them to be as truly divine predictions of the advance of 
science, as the prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, read 
among the ruins of Thebes or Babylon, are seen to be pre- 
dictions of the ruin of empires. Man's discoveries fade 
into insignificance in the presence of such unfolding mys- 
teries ; and we are led to our Bibles, with the prayer, " Open 
mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy 
law." 

4. The ancient charter of the Church was written in the 
language of one of the most recent astronomical discover- 
ies, thirty-six hundred years before Herschel and Bosse en- 
abled us to understand its full significance : "He brought 
him forth abroad, and said unto him, Look now toward heaven, 
and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and 
he said unto him, So shall thy seed &e."* 



* Genesis, chap. xv. 5. 



452 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



The scenery was well calculated to impress Abraham's 
mind with a sense of the ability of Christ to fulfill a very 
glorious promise, by a very improbable event ; but the 
illustration was as well calculated as the promise to test the 
character of that faith which takes God's Word as sufficient 
evidence of things not seen ; for, if the promise was a try- 
ing test of faith, so was the illustration. Before this, G-od 
had promised that his seed should be as the dust of the 
earth ; and afterward he declared it should be as the sand 
of the seashore ; the well-known symbol of a multitude 
beyond all power of calculation. To couple the stars of 
heaven with the sand upon the seashore in any such con- 
nection as to imply that the stars too were innumerable, or 
that their number came within any degree of comparison 
with the ocean sands, must have seemed to Abraham in the 
highest degree mysterious, even as it has appeared to scof- 
fers, in modern times, utterly ridiculous ; for, though the 
first glance at the sky conveys the impression that the stars 
are really innumerable, the investigations of our imperfect 
astronomy seem to assure us that this is by no means the 
case. And, as the patriarch sat, night after night, at his 
tent door, and, in obedience to the command of Christ, 
counted the stars, and made such a catalogue of them as his 
Chaldean preceptors had used, he would very speedily come 
to the conclusion, that so far as he could see, they were by 
no means innumerable ; for the catalogue of Hipparchus 
reckons only one thousand and twenty-two as visible to one 
observer, and the whole number visible in both hemispheres 
by the naked eye does not exceed eight thousand.* And 
even if we suppose, that these old patriarchs had better 
eyes, as we know they had a clearer sky, than modern west- 
ern observers, and that Abraham saw the moons of Jupiter, 
and stars as small, still the number would not seem in the 



* Cosmos 1. 140. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



453 



least degree comparable with the number of the sands upon 
the seashore — whereof a million are contained in a cubic 
inch,* a number greater than the population of the globe 
in a square foot,f while the sum total of the human race, 
from Adam to this hour, would not approach to the aggre- 
gate of the sands of a single mile. Though the stars of a 
size too small to be visible to our eyes, are much more nu- 
merous than the larger stars, yet even up to the range of 
view possessed by ordinary telescopes, they are by no means 
innumerable. In fact, they are counted and registered, and 
the number of the stars of the ninth magnitude, which are 
four times as distant as the most distant visible to our eyes 
— so distant that their light is five hundred and eighty-six 
years in traveling toward us — is declared to be exactly 
thirty-seven thousand seven hundred and thirty-nine. 
Abraham's sense and Abraham's faith must have had many a 
conflict on this promise, as the faith and the sense of many 
of his children, especially the scientific portion of them, 
have since, when reading such portions as this ; and those 
other Scriptures which represent it as an achievement of 
Omniscience, that "he telleth the number of the stars; he 
calleth them all by their names. "J It is indeed remarkable 
how God delights to test the faith of his people, and to 
stumble the pride of fools, by presenting this mysterious 
truth, of the innumerable multitude of the stars, in every 
announcement of the wonderful works of Him who is per- 
fect in wisdom. Infant astronomy stretched out her hands 
to catch the stars, and count them. Many a proud Infidel 
wondered that Moses could be so silly as to suppose he 
could not count the stars, and the believer often wondered 

* Ehrenberg computes that there are forty-one millions of the 
shells of animalculse in a cubic inch of Bilier Slate, 
t Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1860, p. 341. 
t Psalm cxlvii. 4. 



454 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



what these words could mean. But faith rests in the per- 
suasion of two great truths: "God is very wise," and "I 
am very ignorant." 

The increase of knowledge, by widening the boundaries 
of our ignorance, seemed for a time to render the difficulty 
even greater. The increased power of Herschel's tele- I 
scope, and his discovery of the constitution of the Milky j 
Way, mark an era in the progress of astronomy, and enlarge 
our views of the extent of the universe, to an extent in- 
conceivable by those who have not studied the science. 
Where we see only a faint whitish cloud stretching across 
the sky, Herschel's telescope disclosed a vast bed of stars. 
At one time he counted five hundred and eighty-eight stars 
in the field of his telescope. In a quarter of an hour, one 
hundred and sixteen thousand passed before his eye. In 
another portion, he found three hundred and thirty-one 
thousand stars in a single cluster.* He found the whole 
structure of that vast luminous cloud which spans the sky, 
"to consist entirely of stars, scattered by millions, like glit- 
tering dust, on the background of the general heavens." 

Yet still it was not supposed to be at all impossible to 
estimate their numbers. Even this distinguished astrono- 
mer, a few years ago, computed it at eight or ten millions. 
Schroeter allowed twenty degrees of it to pass before him, 
and withdrew from the majestic spactacle, exclaiming, 
"What Omnipotence!" He calculated, however, that the 
number of the stars visible through one of the best tele- 
scopes in Europe, in 1840, was twelve millions; a number 
equaled by a single generation of Abraham's descendants, 
far below the power of computation, and utterly insignifi- 
cant, as compared with the sands of the sea. 

Had our powers of observation stopped here, the great 
promise must still have seemed as mysterious to the astron- 



* Dick's Sidereal Heavens, 59 ; Herschel's Outlines. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



455 



omer, as it once seemed to the Patriarch. But if either 
the Father of the Faithful, or the Father of Sidereal As- 
tronomy, had deluded himself with the notion, that he fully 
comprehended either the words or the works of Him who is 
wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working, and argued 
thence that, because the revealed words and the visible 
works seemed not to correspond, they were really contra- 
dictory, he would have committed the blunder of modern 
Infidels, who assume that they know everything, and that 
as God's knowledge can not be any greater than theirs, 
every Scripture which their science can not comprehend 
must be erroneous. The grandest truths, imperfectly per- 
ceived in the twilight of incipient science, serve as stum- 
bling-blocks for conceited speculators, as well as landmarks 
on the boundaries of knowledge to true philosophers, who 
will ever imbibe the spirit of Newton's celebrated saying: 
" I seem to myself like a child gathering pebbles on the 
shore, while the great ocean of knowledge lies unexplored 
before me;" or the profound remark of Humboldt : "What 
is seen does not exhaust that which is perceptible." 

But the progress of science was not destined merely to 
coast the shore of this ocean. In 1845, Lord Rosse, and a 
band of accomplished astronomers, commenced a voyage 
through the immensities, with a telescope which has en- 
larged our view of the visible universe to one hundred and 
twenty-five million times the extent before perceived, and 
displayed far more accurately the real form and nature of 
objects previously seen. Herschel's researches into the 
Architecture of the Heavens, which have justly rendered 
his name immortal as the science he illustrated, had revealed 
the existence of great numbers of nebulce — clouds of light 
— faint, yet distinct. He supposed many of these to con- 
sist of a luminous fluid, pretty near to us ; at least, com- 
paratively so for to believe that they were stars, so far 
away as to be severally invisible in his forty feet telescope, 



456 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



while yet several of these clouds are distinctly seen by the 
naked eye. involved the belief of distances so astounding, 
and of multitudes so incredible, and of a degree of close- 
ness of the several stars so unparalleled by anything which 
even he had observed, that his imagination and reason 
failed to meet the requirements of such a problem. The 
supposition was, however, thrown out by this gigantic in- 
tellect, that these clouds might be firmaments ; that the 
Bible word heavens might be literally plural ; and more than 
that, he labored in the accumulation of facts which tended 
to confirm it. He disclosed the fact, that several of these 
apparent clouds, which, to very excellent telescopes, dis- 
played only a larger surface of cloudy matter, did, in the 
reflector of his largest telescope, display themselves in their 
true character, as globular clusters, consisting of innumer- 
able multitudes of glorious stars ; and, moreover, that, 
stretching away far beyond star, or Milky Way, or nebulae, 
he had seen, in some parts of the heavens, " a stippling," or 
uniform dotting of the field of view, by points of light too 
small to admit of any one being steadily or fixedly exam- 
ined, and too numerous for counting, were it possible so to 
view them ! What are these ? Millions upon millions of 
years must have elapsed ere that faint light could reach our 
globe, from those profundities of space, though it travels 
like the lightning's flash. If they are stars, the sands of 
the seashore are as inferior in numbers as the surface of 
earth is inferior in dimensions to the arch of heaven. But 
if these faint dots and stipplings are not single stars ! — if 
they are star-clouds — galaxies — firmaments, like our Milky 
Way — our infinity is multiplied by millions upon millions ! 
Imagination pants, reason grows dizzy, arithmetic fails to 
fathom, and human eyes fear to look into the abyss. No 
wonder that this profound astronomer, when a glimpse of 
infinity flashed on his eye, retired from the telescope, 
trembling in every nerve, afraid to behold. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



457 



And yet this astounding supposition is a literal truth ; 
and the light of those suns, whose twilight thus bowed down 
that mighty intellect in reverent adoration, now shines be- 
fore human eyes in all its noonday refulgence. One of the 
most remarkable of these nebulas — one which is visible to a 
good eye in the belt of Orion — has been disclosed to the 
observers at Parsontown as a firmament ; and minute points, 
scarce perceptible to common telescopes, blaze forth as 
magnificent clusters of glorious stars, so close and crowded, 
that no figure can adequately describe them, save the twin 
symbol of the promise, " the sand by the seashore," or " the 
dust of the earth." " There is a minute point, near Polaris," 
says Nicholl, " so minute, that it requires a good telescope 
to discern its being. I have seen it as represented by a 
good mirror, blazing like a star of the first magnitude ; and 
though examined by a potent microscope, clear and definite 
as the distinctest of these our nearest orbs, when beheld 
through an atmosphere not disturbed. Nay, through distances 
of an order I shall scarcely name, I have seen a mass of orbs 
compressed and brilliant, so that each touched on each other, 
like the separate grains of a handful of sand, and yet there 
seemed no melting or fusion of any one of the points into 
the surrounding mass. Each sparkled individually its light 
pure and apart, like that of any constituent of the cluster 
of the Pleiades."* 

" The larger and nearer masses are seen with sufficient 
distinctness to reveal the grand fact decisive of their char- 
acter, viz : that they consist of multitudes of closely related r 
orbs, forming an independent system. In other cases we 
find the individual stars by no means so clearly defined. 
Through effect, in all probability, of distance, the intervals 
between them appear much less, the shining points them- 
selves being also fainter; while the masses still further off 



* Architecture of the Heavens, 62. 



/ 



458 TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 

may be best likened to a handful of golden sand, or, as it is 
aptly termed, star -dust; beyond which no stars, or any ves- 
tige of them, are seen, but only a patch or streak of milky 
light, similar to the unresolved portions of our surrounding 

zcue."* 

To say, then, that the stars of the sky are actually innu- 
merable is only a cold statement of the plainest fact. Hear 
it in the language of one privileged to behold the glories of 
one out of the thousands of similar firmaments: "The 
mottled region forming the lighter part of the mass (the 
nebula in Orion) is a very blaze of stars. But that stellar 
creation, now that we are freed from all dubiety concerning 
the significance of those hazes that float numberless in 
space, how glorious, how endless ! Behold, amid that limit- 
less ocean, every speck, however remote or dim, a noble 
galaxy. Lustrous they are, too ; in manifold instances be- 
yond all neighboring reality — beyond the loftiest dream 
which ever exercised the imagination. The great cluster in 
Hercules has long dazzled the heart with its splendors, but 
we have learned now that among circular and compact gal- 
axies, a class to which the nebulous stars belong, there are 
multitudes which infinitely surpass it — nay, that schemes of 
being rise above it, sun becoming nearer to sun, until their 
skies must be one blaze of light — a throng of burning ac- 
tivities ! But, far aloft stands Orion, the pre-eminent glory 
and wonder of the starry universe ! Judged by the only 
criticism yet applicable, it is perhaps so remote that its 
light does not reach us in less than fifty or sixty thousand 
years; and as at the same time it occupies so large an ap- 
parent portion of the heavens, how stupendous must be the 

* Architecture of the Heavens, 61. These unresolved milky 
streaks and patches have since been discovered to he true nebulaa, 
or phosphoric clouds, in some way connected with their adjacent 

stars. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 459 



extent of the nebula. It would seem almost as if all the 
other clusters hitherto gauged were collected and compressed 
into one, they would not surpass this mighty group, in 
which every wisp- — every wrinkle — is a sand-heap of stars. 
There are cases in which, though imagination has quailed, 
reason may still adventure inquiry, and prolong its specula- 
tions; but at times we are brought to a limit across which 
no human faculty has the strength to penetrate, and where^ 
as now, at the very footstool of the secret Throne, we can 
only bend our heads, and silently adore. And from the in- 
ner Adyta — the invisible shrine of what alone is and en- 
dures — a voice is heard : 

"Hast thou an arm like God? 

" Canst thou thunder with a voice like Him? 

" Canst thou bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, 

" Or loosen the bands of Orion ? 

"Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his seasons? 

"Canst thou guide Arcturus and his sons?* 

" He telleth the number of the stars : 

" He calleth them all by their names. 

"G-reat is our Lord, and of great power; 

"His understanding is infinite. "f 
Thus, nobly does science vindicate Scripture, and display 
the wisdom and power of the Lord of Hosts, whose king- 
dom extends through all space, and endures through all 
duration. He who called these countless hosts of glorious 
orbs into being is abundantly able to multiply, to an equally 
incalculable number, the humble sands which line the 
oceans of terrestrial grace, the brilliant stars which shall 
yet adorn the heavens of celestial glory. All, of every na- 
tion, who shall partake of Abraham's faith, are Abraham's 
children. They are Christ's, and so Abraham's seed, and 



* Architecture of the Heavens, 144. 

t Job, chap, xxxviii. 31. Psalm cxlvii. 4. 



460 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OE SCRIPTURE. 



heirs, according to this promise.* When the great multi- 
tude, which no man can number, out of every nation, and 
tongue, and people, stand before the throne of God, and 
cause the many mansions of our. Father's house to re-echo 
the shout, "Salvation to our God which sitteth on the 
throne, and to the Lamb," the answering hallelujahs of the 
most distant orbs shall expound the purport of that solemn 
oath to Abraham and Abraham's seed : " By myself have I 
sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, 
and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, that in bless- 
ing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy 
seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is upon 
the seashore." \ 

5. It is not probable that the mysteries of the distant 
heavens, or of those future glories of the redeemed which the 
Bible employs them to symbolize, will ever be fully explored 
by man, or adequately apprehended in the present state of 
being But it is most certain that God would not have 
employed the mysteries of astronomy so frequently as the 
symbols of the mysteries of the glory to be revealed, had 
there not been some correspondence between the things 
which eye hath not seen, and these patterns shown in the 
mount. So habitual, indeed, is the Scripture use of these 
visible heavens as the types of all that is exalted, pure, 
cheering, and glorious, that, to most Christians, the word 
has lost its primary meaning, and the idea first suggested to 
their minds by the word heaven is that of future glory ; yet 
their views of the. locality and physical adornments of the 
many mansions of their Father's house are dim and shad- 
owy, just because they do not acquaint themselves suffi- 
ciently with the divine descriptions in the Bible, and the 
divine illustrations in the sky. The Bible would be better 

* Genesis, chap. xxii. 16. 

t Galatians, chap. iii. 14, 29. Gen. xxii. 16, 17. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



461 



understood were the heavens better explored. " I go," said 
Jesus, " to prepare a place for you." The bodies of the 
saints, raised on the resurrection morn, will need a place on 
which to stand. The body of the Lord, which his disciples 
handled, and " saw that a spirit had not flesh and bones, as 
they saw him have," is now resident in a place. Where He 
is, there shall his people be also. Why, then, when the 
Bible employs all that is beauteous in earth, and glorious in 
heaven, to describe the adornments of the palace of the 
King of kings, should we hesitate to believe that the power 
and wisdom of G-od are not exhausted in this little earth of 
ours, but that other worlds may as far transcend ours in 
glory, as many of them do in magnitude ? — or, to allow that 
the glorious visions of Ezekiel and John were not views of 
nonentities, or mere visions of clouds, or of some incom- 
prehensible symbols of more incomprehensible spiritualities, 
but actual views of the existing glories of some portion of 
the universe, presented to us as vividly as the dullness of 
our minds and the earthliness of our speech will permit ? It 
is certain that the recent progress of astronomical discovery 
has revealed celestial scenery which illustrates some of the 
most mysterious of these visions. 

It has long been known, that " one star differeth from an- 
other star in glory," and that the orbs of heaven shine with 
various colors. Sirius is white, Arcturus red, and Procyon 
yellow. The telescope shows all the smaller stars in various 
colors. Under the clear skies of Syria their brilliance is 
vastly greater than in our climate. "One star shines like a 
ruby, another as an emerald, and the whole heavens sparhle 
as with various gems "* But the discovery of the double 
and triple stars has added a new harmony of colors to these 
coronets of celestial jewels. These stars generally display 
the complementary colors. If the one star displays a color 



* Architecture of the Heavens, 217. 



462 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



from the red end of the spectrum, the other is generally of 
the corresponding shade, from the violet end. For instance, 
in 2 Cygni, the large star is yellow, and the two smaller 
stars are blue ; and so in others, through all the colors of 
the rainbow. "It may be easier suggested in words," says 
Sir John Herschel, "than conceived in imagination, what a 
variety of illumination two stars — a red and a green, or a 
yellow and a blue one— must afford a planet circulating 
around either, and what cheering contrasts and grateful 
vicissitudes a red and a green day, for instance, alternating 
with a white one, and with darkness, must arise from the 
presence or absence of one, or other, or both, from the 
horizon."* But suppose one of the globular clusters — for 
instance, that in the constellation Hercules — thus consti- 
tuted ; its unnumbered thousands of suns, wheeling round 
central worlds, and exhibiting their glories to their inhabi- 
tants ; " skies blazing, with grand orbs scattered regularly 
around, and with a profusion to which our darker heavens 
are strangers ; " the overhead sky, seen from the interior 
regions of the cluster, must appear gorgeous beyond descrip- 
tion. In the strictest literality it might be said to the 
dwellers in such a cluster, "Thy sun shall no more go 
down, neither shall thy moon withdraw herself." The sur- 
rounding walls of such a celestial palace must seem indeed 
"garnished with all manner of precious stones." Sapphire, 
emerald, sardius, chrysolite, and pearl, must seem but dim 
mirrors of its glorious refulgence. Under its ever rising 
suns the gates need not be shut at all by day, "for there 
shall be no night there." That glorious place now exists, 
though far away. 

But the Lord of these hosts has said, " Behold, I come 
quickly." He will not tarry. A thousand times faster 
than the swiftest chariot, our solar system and the surround- 



* Architecture of the Heavens, 77, 130. 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



4G3 



ing firmament wing their flight toward that same glorious 
cluster in Hercules. As our firmament approaches, under 
the guidance of Omnipotent wisdom, it too must fly to meet 
our sun, with a velocity increasing with an incalculable 
ratio. The celestial city will then be seen to descend from 
heaven. Once within the sphere of its attractions, our sun 
and surrounding planets will feel their power. Their an- 
cient orbits and accustomed revolutions must give way to 
the higher power. Old things must pass away, and all 
things become new. A new heaven, no less than a new 
earth, will form the dwelling of righteousness. 

These are no longer the visions of prophecy merely, but 
the sober calculations of mathematical science, based upon 
a foundation as solid as the attraction of gravitation, and 
as wide as the existence of that ether whose undulations 
convey the light of the most distant stars ; for. so surely as 
that attraction is efficient, must all the firmaments of the 
heavens be drawn more closely together; and as certainly 
as they revolve not in empty space, but in a medium capa- 
ble of retarding Encke's comet three days in every revolu- 
tion, must that retarding medium bring their revolutions to 
a close. "And so," said Herschel, casting his eye fearlessly 
toward future infinities, "we may be certain that the stars 
in the Milky Way will be gradually compressed, through 
successive stages of accumulation, until they come up to 
what may be called the ripening period of the globular 
cluster." Unnumbered ages may be occupied with such a 
grand evolution of celestial progress, beyond our power of 
calculation; but will the changes of created things, even 
then, have come to an end? Hear again the voice, not of 
the prophet, but of the astronomer: "Around us lie sta- 
bilities of every order ; but it is stability only that we see, 
not permanence. As the course of our inquiry has already 
amply illustrated, even majestic systems, that at first appear 
final and complete, are found to resolve themselves into 



464 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



mere steps or phases of still loftier progress. Verily, it is 
an astonishing world ! Change rising above change — cycle 
growing ont of cycle, in majestic progression — each new 
one ever widening, like the circles that wreathe from a spark 
of flame, enlarging as they ascend, finally to become lost in 
the empyrean ! And if all that we see, from earth to sun, 
and from sun to universal star-work — that wherein we best 
behold images of eternity, immortality and God — if that is 
only a state or space of a course of being rolling onward 
evermore, what must be the Creator, the Preserver, the 
Guide of all ! — He at whose bidding these phantasms came 
from nothingness, and shall again disappear ; — whose name, 
amid all things, alone is Existence — I am that I am? 

••Of old hast thou laid the foundations of the earth, 

"And the heavens are the works of thy hands; 

" They shall perish. 

" But thou shalt endure ; 

"Yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment: 
"As a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be 
changed ; 

"But thou art the same, 

" And thy years shall have no end. 

"The children of thy servants shall continue, 

"And their seed shall be established before thee." 

Psalm cii. 25. 
"And I saw a new heaven, and a new earth: 
" For the first heaven and the first earth were passed away^ 
" And there was no more sea. 
"And I John saw the holy city, Xew Jerusalem, 
"Coming down from God out of heaven, 
'•' Prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 
"And I heard a great voice out of heaven, saying, 
"Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, 
" And he will dwell with them, 



TELESCOPIC VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE. 



465 



" And they shall be his people, 

"And God himself shall be with them, and be their God " 

Revelation xxi. 

Reader, is this glorious heaven your inheritance ? Is this 
unchangeable Jehovah your God? Are you looking for 
and hasting unto the coming of the day of God? Is it 
your daily prayer, Even so, Lord Jesus, come quickly ? 

30 



CHAPTER XIII. 



JSciENCE, OR j^AITH? 



" Faith is destined to be left behind in the onward march 
of the human intellect. It belongs to an infantile stage of 
intellectual development, when experience, dependent on 
testimony, becomes the slave of credulity. Children and 
childish nations are prone to superstition. Religion belongs 
properly to such. Hence the endless controversies of re- 
ligious sects. But as man advances into the knowledge of 
the physical sciences, and becomes familiarized with math- 
ematical demonstration and scientific experiment, he de- 
mands substantial proofs for all kinds of knowledge, and re- 
jects that which is merely matter of faith. The certainties 
of science succeed the controversies of creeds. Science 
thus becomes the grave of religion, as religion is vulgarly 
understood. But science gives a new and better religion to 
the world. Instead of filling men's minds with the vague 
terrors of an unknown futurity, it directs us to the best 
modes of improving this life." — " This life being the first 
in certainty, give it the first place in importance; and by 
giving human duties in reference to men the precedence, 
secure that all interpretations of spiritual duty shall be in 
harmony with human progress." — '' Nature refers us to 
science for help, and to humanity for sympathy ; love to the 
lovely is our only homage, study our only praise, quiet sub- 
mission to the inevitable our duty; and truth is our only 
worship." — :: Our knowledge is confined to this life; and 
testimony, and conjecture, and probability, are all that can 

(466) 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



4G7 



be set forth in regard to another." — " Preach nature and 
science, morality and art ; nature, the only subject of knowl- 
edge ; morality, the harmony of action; art, the culture of 
the individual and society."* 

Or, if you will insist upon preaching religion, support it 
" with such proofs as accompany physical science. This I 
have always loved ; for I never find it deceives me. I rest 
upon it with entire conviction. There is no mistake, and 
can be no dispute in mathematics. And if a revelation 
comes from God, why have we not such evidence for it as 
mathematical demonstration ? " 

Such is the language now used by a large class of half- 
educated people, who, deriving their philosophy from Comte, 
and their religion from the Westminster Revieiv, invite us 
to spend our Sabbaths in the study of nature in the fields 
and museums, turn our churches into laboratories, exchange 
our Bibles for encyclopedias, give ourselves no more trouble 
about religion, but try hard to learn as much science, make 
as much money, and enjoy as much pleasure in this life as 
we can ; because we know that we live now, and can only 
believe that we shall live hereafter. I do not propose to take 
any notice here of the proposal of Secularism — for that is 
the new name of this ungodliness — to deliver men from their 
lusts by scientific lectures, and keep them moral by over- 
turning religion. That experiment has been tried already. 
But it is worth while to inquire, Is science really so posi- 
tive, and religion so uncertain, as these persons allege ? Is 
a knowledge of the physical sciences so all-sufficient for our 
present happiness, so attainable by all mankind, and so cer- 
tain and infallible, that we should barter our immortality for 
it? And, on the other hand,are the great facts of religious 
experience, and the foundations of our religious faith, so 
dim, and vague, and utterly uncertain, that we may safely 



* Holyoak's Discussion with Grant and Tonney. 



468 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



consign them to oblivion, or that we can so get rid of them 
if we would? 

The object of this chapter is to refute both parts of the 
Secularist's statement ; to show some of the uncertainties, 
errors, contradictions, and blunders of the scientific men on 
whose testimony they receive their science ; and to exhibit 
a few of the facts of religious experience which give a suf- 
ficient warrant for the Christian's faith. 

Scientific observations are made by fallible men exposed 
to every description of error, prejudice and mistake; men 
who can not possibly divest themselves of their precon- 
ceived opinions in observing facts, and framing theories. 

Lord Bacon long ago observed that " the eye of the hu- 
man intellect is not dry, but receives a suffusion from the 
will and the affections, so that it may be almost said to en- 
gender any science it pleases. For what a man wishes to 
be true, that he prefers believing." " If the human intel- 
lect hath once taken a liking to any doctrine, either because 
received and credited, or because otherwise pleasing, it 
draws everything else into harmony with that doctrine, and 
to its support ; and albeit there may be found a more pow- 
erful array of contradictory instances, these, however, it 
does not observe, or it contemns, or by distinction extenu- 
ates, and rejects."* 

A prejudiced observer sees the facts distorted and exag- 
gerated. " Thus it is that men will not see in the phenom- 
ena what alone is to be seen ; in their observations they in- 
terpolate and expunge ; and this mutilated and adulterated ! 
product they call a fact. And why ? Because the real . 
phenomena, if admitted, would spoil the pleasant music of 
their thoughts, and convert its factitious harmony into a 
discord. In consequence of this many a system professing 
to be reared exclusively on observation and fact, rests, in 



* Bacon Novum Organum, I. xlix. xlvi. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



469 



reality, mainly upon hypothesis and fiction. A pretended ■ 
experience is indeed the screen behind which every illusive 
doctrine regularly retires. ' There are more false facts,' 
says Cullen, ' current in the world than false theories.' Fact, 
observation, induction, have always been the watchwords of 
those who have dealt most extensively in fancy."* We 
propose, therefore, to show that, /. The students of the phys- 
ical sciences have no such certain knowledge of their facts 
and theories as Secularists pretend. 

1. Mathematical science relating merely to abstract truth 
is supposed to possess powers of demonstration, and capa- 
bility of scientific certainty superior to all other kinds of 
knowledge, But the moment we begin to apply it to any 
existing facts we enter the domain of liability to errors as 
numerous as our fallible observations of these facts ; and 
when we attempt to apply mathematical demonstration to 
the infinite, and to enter the domain of faith, in which as 
immortals we are chiefly concerned, it baffles, deceives, and 
insults our reason Take the following illustrations: 

Let an infinite whole be divided into halves ; the parts 
must be either finite or infinite. But they can not be finite, 
else an infinite whole would consist of a finite number of 
parts ; neither can they be infinite, being each less than the 
infinite whole. 

Again : it is mathematically demonstrable, that any piece 
of matter is infinitely divisible. A line therefore of half an 
inch long is infinitely divisible, or divisible into an infinite 
number of parts. Thus we have an infinite half inch. 
Further, for a moving body to pass a given point requires 
some time ; and to pass an infinite number of points must 
require an infinite number of portions of time, or an eter- 
nity ; therefore, as half an inch contains an infinite number 
of points, it will require eternity to pass half an inch. 



* Sir W. Hamilton's Lectures, I. 53. 



470 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



Again ; it is mathematically demonstrable, that a straight 
line, the asymptote of a hyperbola, may eternally approach 
the curve of the hyperbola and never meet it But no axiom 
can be plainer than that if two lines continually approach 
each other they must at length meet. Here is a demonstra- 
tion contradicting an axiom ; and no man has ever yet 
shown the possibilities of reconciling them, nor yet of de- 
nying either side of the contradiction. 

Again : it is a fundamental axiom, contained in the defi- 
nition of a circle, that it must have a center ; but the non- 
existence of this center is mathematically demonstrable, as 
follows : Let the diameter of the circle be bisected into two 
equal parts ; the center must be in one, or the other, of 
these parts, or between them. It can not be in one of 
these parts, for they are equal : and. therefore, if it is in 
the one, it must also be in the other, and thus the circle 
would have two centers, which is absurd. Neither can it 
be between them, for they are in contact. Therefore the 
center must be a point, destitute of extension, something 
which does not occupy or exist in space. But as all exist- 
ences exist in space, and this supposed center does not. it 
can not be an existence ; therefore it is a non-existence. 

In like manner it has been mathematically demonstrated,* 
that motion, or any change in the rate of progress in a mov- 
ing body, is impossible; because in passing from any one 
degree of rapidity to another, all the intermediate degrees 
must be passed through. As when a train of cars moving 
four miles an hour strikes a train at rest, the resulting in- 
stantaneous motion is two miles an hour ; and the first train 
must therefore be moving at the rate of four, and at the 
rate of two miles an hour at the same time, which is im- 
possible. And so the ancients demonstrated the impossi- 
bility of motion. 



* Journal of Speculative Philososphy, I. 20. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



471 



Thus the non-existence of the most undeniable truths, 
and the impossibilities of the most common facts are mathe- 
matically demonstrable ; and the proper refutation of such 
reasoning is, not the scientific, but the common sensible ; as 
when Plato refuted the demonstration of the impossibility 
of motion, by getting up and walking across the floor. In 
the hyperbola we have the mathematical demonstration of 
the error of an axiom. In the infinite inch we behold an ab- 
surdity mathematically demonstrated So that it appears we 
can give mathematical demonstration in support of untruth, 
impossibilities and absurdities ; and our reason can not dis- 
cover the error of the reasoning ! Alas, for poor humanity, 
if an endless destiny depended upon such scientific cer- 
tainty ! Yet mathematical reasoning about abstract truth 
is universally conceded to be less liable to error than any 
other form of scientific analysis This line, then, is too 
short to fathom the ocean of destiny ; too weak to bear in- 
ferences from even the facts of common life. 

Attempts have indeed been made to apply mathematics 
to the facts of life in what is called the doctrine of chances. 
By this kind of calculation it can be shown, that the chances 
were a thousand millions to one that you and I should never 
have been born. Yet here we are. 

But when we begin to apply mathematics to the affairs of 
e very-day life, we immediately multiply our chances of er- 
ror by the number and complexity of these facts. The 
proper field of mathematics is that of magnitude and num- 
bers. But very few subjects are capable of a mathematical 
demonstration. JSTo fact whatever which depends on the 
will of God or man can be so proved. For mathematical 
demonstration is founded on necessary and eternal relations, 
and admits of no contingencies in its premises. The math- 
ematician may demonstrate the size and properties of a tri- 
angle, but he can not demonstrate the continuance of any 
actual triangle for one hour, or one minute, after his dem- 



472 



SCIENCE. OR FAITH ? 



onstration. And if he could, how many of my most im- 
portant affairs can I submit to the multiplication table, or 
lay off in squares and triangles ? It deals with purely ideal 
figures, which never did or could exist. There is not a 
mathematical line — length without breadth — in the universe. 
When we come to the application of mathematics, we are 
met at once by the fact that there are no mathematical fig- 
ures in nature. It is true we speak of the orbits of the 
planets as elliptical or circular, but it is only in a general 
way. as we speak of a circular saw. the outline of its teeth 
being regularity itself compared with the perturbations of 
the planets. TVe speak of the earth as a spheroid, but it is 
a spheroid pitted with hollows as deep as the ocean, and 
crusted with irregular protuberances as vast as the Hima- 
laya and the Andes, in every conceivable irregularity of form. 
Its seas, coasts, and rivers follow no straight lines nor 
geometrical curves. There is not an acre of absolutely 
level ground on the face of the earth ; and even its waters 
will pile themselves up in waves, or dash into breakers, 
rather than remain perfectly level for a single hour. Its 
minuter formations present the same regular irregularity of 
form. Even the crystals, which approach the nearest of 
any natural productions to mathematical figures, break with 
compound irregular fractures at their bases of attachment. 
The surface of the pearl is proportionally rougher than the 
surface of the earth, and the dew-drop is not more spheri- 
cal than a pear. As nature then gives no mathematical 
figures, mathematical measurements of such figures can be 
only approximately applied to natural objects. 

The utter absence of any regularity, or assimilation to 
the spheroidal figure, either in meridianal, equatorial, or 
parallel lines, mountain ranges, sea beaches, or courses of 
rivers, is fatal to mathematical accuracy in the more ex- 
tended geographical measurements. It is only by taking 
the mean of a great many measurements that an approxi- 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



473 



mate accuracy can be obtained. Where this is not possible, 
as in the case of the measurements of high mountains, the 
truth remains undetermined by hundreds of feet; or, as in 
the case of the earth's spheroidal axis, Bessel's measure- 
ment differs from Newton's, by fully eleven miles.* The 
smaller measures are proportionately as inaccurate. No 
field, hill, or lake, has an absolute mathematical figure ; but 
its outline is composed of an infinite multitude of irregular 
curves too minute for man's vision to discover, and too nu- 
merous for his intellect to estimate. No natural figure was 
ever measured with absolute accuracy. 

All the resources of mathematical science were employed 
by the constructors of the French Metric System; but the 
progress of science in seventy years has shown that every 
element of their calculations was erroneous. They tried to 
measure a quadrant of the earth's circumference, supposing 
the meridian to be circular ; but Schubert has shown that 
that is far from being the case ; and that no two meridians 
arealike; and Sir John Herschel, and the best geologists, 
show cause to believe that the form of the globe is con- 
stantly changing; so that the ancient Egyptians acted 
wisely in selecting the axis of the earth's rotation, which is 
invariable, and not the changing surface of the earth, as 
their standard of measure 

The Astronomer Royal, Piazzi Smyth, thus enumerates 
the errors of practice, which they added to those of their 
erroneous theory: "Their trigonometrical survey for their 
meter length has been found erroneous, so that their meter 
is no longer sensibly a meter ; and their standard tempera- 
ture of 0° centigrade is upset one way for the length of 
their scale, and another way for the density of the water 
employed ; and their mode of computing the temperature 
correction is proved erroneous; and their favorite natural 



* Humboldt, Cosmos, Yol. I. p. 7, 156. 



474 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



reference of a quadrant of the earth is not found a scientific 
feature capable of serving the purpose they have been em- 
ploying it for; and even their own sons show some dislike 
to adopt it fully, and adhere to as much of the ancient sys- 
tem as they can."* 

But coming down to more practical and every-day calcu- 
lations, in which money is invested, how very erroneous are 
the calculations of our best engineers, and how fatal their 
results. Nineteen serious errors were discovered in an edi- 
tion of Taylor 's Logarithms, printed in 1796; some of 
which might have led to the most dangerous results in cal- 
culating a ship's place, and were current for thirty-six 
years. In 1832 the Nautical Almanac published a cor- 
rection which was itself erroneous by one second, and a new 
correction was necessary the next year. But in making 
this correction a new error was committed of ten degrees j 
Who knows how many ships were run ashore by that error? 

Nor can our American mathematicians boast of superior 
infallibility to the French or British. In computing the 
experiments which were made at Lowell (for a new turbine 
wheel), it was found that when the gate was fully open, the 
quantity of water discharged through the guides was seventy 
per cent, of the theoretical discharge. (An error of thirty 
per cent.) The effect of the wheel during these experi- 
ments was eighty-one and a half per cent, of the power ex- 
pended, but when the gate was half open the effect was 
sixty-seven per cent, of the power, while the discharge 
through the guides eleven per cent, more than the theoret- 
ical discharge. But when the opening of the gate was still 
further reduced to one-fourth of the full opening, the ef- 
fect was also reduced to forty-five per cent of the power, 
while the discharging velocity was raised to forty-nine per 

* Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid, 358. 
t Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1852. 



/ 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 475 

cent, more than that given by the theory* An unscientific 
man would hardly call that good guessing; but it was the 
best result of labored and expensive scientific calculation. 
No wonder the London Mechanics Magazine says: "More 
can be learned in this way (testing engines in the workshop) 
in half an hour, than can be derived from the theoretical 
instructions, however good, in a year." So much for the 
infallibility of a mathematical demonstration. In regard 
even to the very limited circle of our relations which can 
be measured by the foot rule, and the small number of our 
anxieties which may be resolved by an equation, if by 
mathematical accuracy be meant anything more than toler- 
able correctness, or by mathematical demonstration a very 
high degree of probability, mathematical certainty is all a 
fable. 

2. Astronomy. 

The omniscience and prescience of the human intellect 
have been largely glorified by some Infidel lecturers, upon 
the strength of the accuracy with which it is possible to 
calculate and predict eclipses, and to the disparagement of 
Bible predictions And this glorification has been amaz- 
ingly swollen by Le Verrier's prediction in 1846 of the dis- 
covery of the planet Neptune. But the prediction of some 
unknown motion would form a more correct basis for a com- 
parison of the prophecies of science with those of Scrip- 
ture; such, for instance, as Immanuell Kant's prediction of 
the period of Saturn's rotation at six hours twenty three 
minutes fifty-three seconds; " which mathematical calcula- 
tion of an unknown motion of a heavenly body," he says, 
"is the only prediction of that kind in pure Natural Phi- 
losophy, and awaits confirmation at a future period." It is 
a pity that this unique scientific prediction should not have 
had better luck, for the encouragement of other guessers; 



* Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1852. 



476 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



but after waiting long and vainly, for the expected confirm- 
ation, it was finally falsified by Herschel's discovery of spots 
on the surface of the planet, and observation of the true 
time, ten hours sixteen minutes forty-four seconds.* This, 
however, was not his only astronomical prediction. He 
predicted that immense bodies in a transition state between 
planets and comets, and of very eccentric orbits, would be 
found beyond the orbit of Saturn, and intersecting it, but 
no such bodies have been discovered. Uranus and Nep- 
tune have no cometary character whatever, their orbits are 
less eccentric than others and do not intersect, nor approach 
within millions of miles of Saturn's orbit. The verification 
of Le Verrier's prediction affords even a more satisfactory 
proof of the necessarily conjectural character of astronom- 
ical computations of unknown quantities and distances. 
The planet Neptune has not one-half the mass which he 
had calculated ; his orbit, which was calculated as very el- 
liptical, is nearly circular; and the error of the calculation 
of his distance is three hundred millions of miles !f 

"Let us then be candid," says Loomis, "and claim no 
more for astronomy than is reasonably due. When in 1846 
Le Verrier announced the existence of a planet hitherto 
unseen, and when he assigned it its exact position in the 
heavens, and declared that it shone like a star of the eighth 
magnitude, and with a perceptible disc, not an astronomer of 
France, and scarce an astronomer in Europe, had sufficient 
faith in the prediction to prompt him to point his telescope 
to the heavens. But when it was announced that the planet 
had been seen at Berlin, that it was found within one de- 
gree of the computed place, that it was indeed a star of the 
eighth magnitude, and had a sensible disc — then the en- 
thusiasm not only of the public generally, but of astrono- 

* Cosmos, 4, 518. Dick's Celestial Scenery, chap. III. Sec. 7. 
t Cosmos, 1, 75. Loomis' Progress of Astronomy, pp. 34, 40. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



477 



mers also, was even more wonderful than their former apathy. 
The sagacity of Le Verrier was felt to be almost superhuman. 
Language could scarce be found strong enough to express 
the general admiration. The praise then lavished upon 
Le Verrier was somewhat extravagant. The singularly 
close agreement between the observed and computed places of 
the planet was accidental. So exact a coincidence could not 
reasonably have been anticipated. If the planet had been 
found even ten degress from what Le Verrier assigned as 
its probable place, this discrepancy would have surprised no 
astronomer. The discovery would still have been one of 
the most remarkable events in the history of astronomy, and 
Le Verrier would have merited the title of First Astrono- 
mer of the age."* 

Nevertheless, astronomy from the comparative simplicity 
of the bodies and forces with which it has to deal, and the 
approximate regularity of the paths of the heavenly bodies, 
may be regarded as the science in which the greatest pos- 
sible certainty is attainable. It opens at once the widest 
field to the imagination, and the noblest range to the rea- 
son ; it has attracted the most exalted intellects to its pur- 
suit, and has rewarded their toils with the grandest discov- 
eries. These discoveries have been grossly abused by in- 
ferior minds, ascribing to the discoverers of the laws of the 
universe the glory due to their Creator; and boasting of the 
power of the human mind, as if it were capable of explor- 
ing the infinite in space, and of calculating the movements 
of the stars through eternity. Persons who could not cal- 
culate an eclipse to save their souls, have risked them upon 
the notion that, because astronomers can do so with con- 
siderable accuracy, farmers ought to reject the Bible, unless 
its predictions can be calculated by algebra. It may do 
such persons good, or at least prevent them from doing oth- 



* Loomis' Progress of Astronomy, p. 34, etc. 



478 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



ers harm, to take a cursory view of the errors of astrono- 
mers; errors necessary as well as accidental. 

Sir John Herschel, than whom none has a better right 
to speak on this subject, and whose devotion to that noble 
science precludes all supposition of prejudice against it, 
devotes a chapter to The Errors of Astronomy* which he * 
classifies and enumerates : j 

" I. External causes of error, comprehending such as de- 
pend on external uncontrollable circumstances; such as 
fluctuations of weather, which disturb the amount of re- 
fraction from its tabulated value, and being reducible to no 
fixed laws, induce uncertainty to the amount of their own 
possible magnitude. 

"II. Errors of observation; such as arise for instance 
from inexpertness, defective vision, slowness in seizing the 
exact instant of the occurrence of a phenomenon, or pre- 
cipitancy in anticipating it; from atmospheric indistinct- 
ness, insufficient optical power in the instrument, and the 
like. 

"III. The third, and by far the most numerous class of 
errors, arise from causes which may be deemed instrumental, 
and which may be divided into two classes. 

"The first arises from an instrument not being what it 
professes to be, which is error of workmanship. Thus if 
an axis or pivot, instead of being as it ought, exactly cylin- 
drical, be slightly flattened or elliptical — if it be not ex- 
actly concentric with the circle which it carries — if this 
circle so called be in reality not exactly circular — or not in 
one plane — if its divisions, intended to be precisely equi- 
distant, shall be in reality at unequal intervals — and a hun- 
dred other things of the same sort. 

"The other subdivision of instrumental errors compre- 
hends such as arise from an instrument not being placed in 

* Outlines of Astronomy, III. Sec. 13, 140. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



479 



the position it ought to have; and from those of its parts 
which are made purposely movable not being properly dis- 
posed, inter se. These are errors of adjustment. Some are 
unavoidable, as they arise from a general unsteadiness of 
the soil or building in which the instruments are placed * 
Others again are consequences of imperfect workmanship ; 
as when an instrument, once well adjusted, will not remain 
so. But the most important of this class of errors arise 
from the non-existence of natural indications other than 
those afforded by astronomical observations themselves, 
whether an instrument has, or has not, the exact position 
with respect to the horizon, and the cardinal points, etc., 
which it ought to have, properly to fulfill its object. 

"Now, with regard to the first two classes of error, it 
must be observed, that in so far as they can not be reduced 
to known laws, and thereby become the subjects of calcula- 
tion and due allowance, they actually vitiate to their full ex- 
tent the results of any observations in which they subsist. 
With regard to errors of adjustment, not only the possibil- 
ity, but the certainty of their existence in every imaginable 
form, in all instruments, must be contemplated. Human 
hands or machines never formed a circle, drew a straight 
line, or executed a perpendicular, nor ever placed an instru- 
ment in perject adjustment, unless accidentally, and then only 
during an instant of time.' 1 

The bearing of the~e important and candid admissions of er- 
ror in astronomical observations upon all kinds of other ob- 
servations made by mortal eyes, and with instruments framed 
by human hands, in every department of science, is obvious. 
No philosophical observation or experiment is absolutely ac- 
curate, or can possibly be more than tolerably near the truth. 

* Thus several of the best telescopes in the world are rendered 
nearly useless by the passage of heavy railroad trains in their 
vicinity. 



480 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



The error of a thousandth part of an inch in an instrument 
will multiply itself into thousands, and millions of miles, ac- 
cording to the distance of the object, or the profundity of 
the calculation. Our faith in the absolute infallibility of scien- 
tific observers, and consequently in the absolute certainty of 
science, being thus rudely upheaved from its very foundations 
by Sir John Herschel's crowbar, we are prepared to learn 
that scientific men have made errors great and numerous. 

To begin at home, with our own little globe, where cer- 
tainty is much more attainable than among distant stars, we 
have seen that astronomers of the very highest rank are by 
no means agreed as to its diameter. Its precise form is 
equally difficult to determine Newton showed that an 
ellipsoid of revolution should differ from a sphere by a com- 
pression of -giro- The mean of a number of varying meas- 
urements of arcs, in five different places, would give ^Vg"' 
The pendulum measurement differs very considerably from 
both, and '''no two sets of pendulum experiments give the 
same result "* The same liability to error, and uncertainty 
of the actual truth, attends the other modes of ascertaining 
this fundamental measurement. A very small error here 
will vitiate all other astronomical calculations; for the earth's 
radius, and the radius of its orbit, are the foot-rule and sur- 
veyor's chain with which the astronomer measures the heav- 
ens. But this last and most used standard is uncertain; 
and of the nine different estimates, it is certain that eight 
must be wrong ; and probably that all are erroneous. For 
example, Encke, in 1761, gives the earth's distance from the 
sun at ----- 95,141,830 
Encke, in 1769, - - - 95,820,610 
Lacaille, ----- 76,927,900 
Henderson, - 90,164,110 
Gillies and Gould, - - - 96,160,000 



* Somerville's Physical Sciences, VI. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



481 



Mayer, .... 104,097,100 
Le Verrier, - 91,066,350 
Sir John Herschel, - - 91,718,000 
Humboldt, - 82,728,000* 
Here now is the fundamental standard measure of as- 
tronomy; and nine first-class astronomers are set to deter- 
mine its length ; but their measurements range all the way 
from seventy-seven to one hundred and four millions of 
miles — a difference of nearly one-fourth. Why the old- 
fashioned finger and thumb measure used before the carpen- 
ter's two-foot rule was invented never made such discrep- 
ancies; it could always make a foot within an inch more or 
less; but our scientific measurers, it seems, can not guess 
within two inches on the foot. 

Their smaller measurements are equally inaccurate. Lias 
says the Aurora Borealis is only two and a half miles high; 
Hood and Richardson make its height double that, or five 
miles; Olmsted and Twining run it up to forty -two, one hun- 
dred, and one hundred and sixty miles If When they are 
tlnls inaccurate in the measurement of a phenomenon so 
near the earth, how can we believe in the infallibility of 
their measurements of the distances of the stars and the 
nebulae in the distant heavens ? 

The moon is the nearest to us of all the heavenly bodies, 
and exercises the greatest influence of any, save the sun, 
upon our crops, ships, health, and lives, and consequently 
has hnd a larger share of astronomical attention than any 
other celestial body. But the most conflicting statements 
are made by astronomers regarding her state and influences. 
There is no end to the controversy whether the moon in- 
fluences the weather; though one would think that ques- 

* Cosmos IV. 477. Phillips' Address to the British Association, 
1865. 

t North British Review, LXV. 
31 



482 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



tion, being rather a terrestrial one, could easily be decided. 
Schwabe says Herschel is wrong in saying that tlie years of 
most solar spots were fruitful ; but Wolf looks up the Zurich 
meteorological tables, and confirms Herschel. 

In Ferguson s Astronomy, the standard text-book of its 
day, we are informed that "Some of her mountains (the 
moon's), by comparing their height with her diameter, are 
found to be three times higher than the highest hills on 
earth."' They would thus be over fifteen miles high. But 
Sir Wm. Herschel assures us that ' The generality do not 
exceed half a mile in their general elevation." Transactions 
of the Royal Society, May 11, 1780. Beer and Madler have 
measured thirty-nine whose height they assure us exceed 
Mont Blanc. But M. Gussew, of the Imperial Observa- 
tory at Wilna, describes to us, "a mountain mass in the form 
of a meniscus lens, rising in the middle to a height of sev- 
enty-nine English miles. "* As this makes the moon lop- 
sided, with the heavy side toward the earth, the question 
of an atmosphere, and of the moon's inhabitability is re- 
opened ; and the discussion seems to favor the man in the 
moon ; only he keeps on the other side always, so that we 
can not see him. 

The best astronomers have gravely calculated the most 
absurd problems — for instance the projection of meteorites 
from lunar volcanoes ; Poisson calculated that they would 
require an initial velocity of projection of seven thousand 
nine hundred and ninety-five feet per second; others de- 
manded eight thousand two hundred and eighty two; 01- 
bers demanded fourteen times as much; but La Place, the 
great inventor of the nebular theory, after thirty years' 
study fixed it definitely at seven thousand eight hundred 
and sixty-two ! It appears that the absurdity of the dis- 

* Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1864, 158. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



483 



charging force of a part greater than the attracting force of 
the whole never occurred to him.* 

This same La Place supposed, that he could have placed 
the moon in a much better position for giving light than 
she now occupies; and that this was the only object of her 
existence. As this was not done he argued that her waxing 
and waning light was a proof that she was not located by 
an Omniscient Creator. He says he would have placed her 
in the beginning in opposition to the sun, in the plane of the 
ecliptic, and about four times her present distance from us, 
with such a motion as would ever maintain that position, 
thus securing full moon from sunset to sunrise, without pos- 
sibility of eclipse. But Lionville demonstrates that "if the 
moon had occupied at the beginning the position assigned 
her, by the illustrious author of the Mecanique Celeste, she 
could not have maintained it but a very short time."f In 
short, La Place's hypothetical calculations generally have 
proved erroneous when applied to any existing facts; and 
we have no reason to attach more value to his nebular the- 
ory calculations. 

The sun is the principal orb of our system, and by far 
the most conspicuous, and the most observed of all observers ? 
astronomers included But we have seen already how con- 
tradictory their measurements of his distance, and their 
observations of the influence of his spots Far more con- 
flicting are the theories as to his constitution, of which in- 
deed we may truly say very little was known before the 
application of photography and the spectroscope to heliog- 
raphy within the last seven years. One astronomer fixed 
the period of his rotation at twenty-five days, fourteen hours, 
and eight minutes ; another at twenty-six days, forty-six 
minutes ; another at twenty-four days, twenty-eight minutes. J 

* Cosmos I. 109. 
t Cosmos IV. 501. 
t Cosmos IY. 378. 



484 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



In regard to the sun's heat, a matter fundamental to the 
nebular theory, the calculations diner widely, and some of 
them must be grossly erroneous. M. Yicaire called the 
attention of the French Academy, at a recent meeting, to 
this unsatisfactory condition of science. Father Secchi es- 
timates it at eighteen million Fahrenheit; while Pouillet 
says it ranges from two thousand six hundred and sixty-two 
to three thousand two hundred and one ; and others range 
from two hundred thousand downward. The most singular 
thing is that these results are derived from observations or 
radiations made by apparatus identical in principle.* But 
TTaterston calculates the temperature of the solar surface 
at above ten. and probably twelve .million Fahrenheit.f 

Now what feeds these enormous fires? The old opinion 
of astronomy, that the sun was a mass of fire, was assailed 
by Sir Wm. Herschel, who maintained that it was in the 
condition of a perpetual magnetic storm. This notion was 
altered into the belief of a central dark body, surrounded 
by a stratum of clouds, outside of which is a photosphere 
of light and heat; which some made one thousand five hun- 
dred miles in depth, others four thousand. Outside of this 
was another layer of rose-colored clouds. To this theory 
Arago, Sir John Herschel, and Humboldt assented. But 
Le Yerrier declares that the facts observed during late 
eclipses are contrary to this theory, and a new theory is 
slow in process of construction, to be demolished in its turn 
by later observations.! 

One of the most recent theories is that the fuel is fur- 
nished by a stream of meteorites, planetoids, and comets, 
falling in by the power of attraction, and being speedily 
converted into gas flames ; a process the very reverse of the 
theory of the evolution of the solid celestial bodies from 

* Harper's Magazine, June, 1872, p. 149. 
t Annual Scientific Discovery, 1864, 134. 
t Cosmos III. 40; IY. 363. Annual, 1861, 395, 396. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



485 



gas. But it is pretty evident from these conflicting theo- 
ries that nobody knows anything certainly as to the materi- 
als of the sun, or the fuel which feeds his flames. But if 
the very best astronomers do not know of what he is made, 
is it not too great a demand upon our credulity to ask us 
to believe that they can tell how he was made? 

The size, density, and distances of the planets, which 
form such essential elements in the calculations of the neb- 
ular theory of evolution, are equally uncertain. Ten or 
twelve years ago Mercury was believed to be nearly three 
times as dense as the earth (2.94) ; and the theory of evo- 
lution was partly based upon this assumed fact. But Hau- 
sen now finds that it is not half so dense ; that, as compared 
with the earth, it is only 1.22; and that its mass is less than 
half (^-) of what had been confidently calculated.* Cor- 
rections of the masses and densities of other planets are 
also offered. 

Still wider differences prevail in calculating the velocities 
of these bodies; velocities calculated and found to corre- 
spond with the theory of evolution. Bianchini gives the 
period of the rotation of Venus at twenty -four days, eight 
hours ; but Schroeter says it is not as many hours as Bian- 
chini gives days ; that it is only twenty-three hours and 
twenty minutes. Sir Wm. Herschel can not tell which is 
right, or whether both are wrong. f 

From such imperfect and erroneous calculations astrono- 
mers have deduced what they called a laio, which holds the 
same place in nature that the Blue Laws of Connecticut 
maintain in history ; and which like them have imposed 
upon the credulous. Titius and Bode imagined that they 
had discovered that, " When the distances of the planets 
are examined, it is found that they are almost all removed 



* Cosmos IV. 474. 

t Kendall's Uranography, p. 11. 



486 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



from each other by distances which are in the same propor- 
tion as their magnitudes increase." And this law played 
an important part in introducing the theory of evolution, 
which, it was alleged, exactly corresponded with such an 
arrangement But more accurate calculations and recent 
discoveries have dissipated the supposed order of progres- 
sion. Humboldt says of it, it is " a law which scarcely de- 
serves this name, and which is called by Lalande and De- 
lambre a play of numbers ; by others a help for the mem- 
ory. * * * In reality the distances between Jupiter, 
Saturn, and Uranus approximate very closely to the dupli- 
cation. Nevertheless, since the discovery of Neptune, 
which is much too near Uranus, the defectiveness in the 
progression has become strikingly evident." And Olbers 
rejects it, as " contrary to the nature of all truths which 
merit the name of laws ; it agrees only approximately with 
observed facts in the case of most planets, and what does 
not appear to have been once observed, not at all in the case 
of Mercury. It is evident that the series, 4, 4+3, 4+6, 
4+12,4+48, 4+96, 4+192, with which the distances should 
correspond, is not a continuous series at all. The number 
which precedes 4+3 should not be 4; i. <?., 4+0, but 4+1 J. 
Therefore between 4 and 4+3 there should be an infinite 
number, or as Wurm expresses it, for n=l, there is obtained 
from 4+2 n " 2 .3; not 4, but 5|."* Thus this so-called law 
is erroneous in both ends, and defective in the middle. 
Finally it has been utterly abolished by the discovery of the 
planet Vulcan, which does not correspond to any such law.f 
If the theory of evolution then corresponds to Bode's law, 
as its advocates alleged, it corresponds to a myth. 

About the nebulae which have played so large a part in 
the atheistic world building, our astronomers are utterly at 



* Cosmos, 443-5. 

t North British Keview, No. LXV. 



SCIENCE, OR EAITII? 



487 



variance. Sir John Herschel says they are far away beyond 
the stars in space. But the Melbourne astronomer, M. Le 
Seur, suggests that the star Eta and the nebulous matter are 
neighbors ; that the nebulous matter formerly around it, 
which has recently disappeared, while the star has blazed 
up into flames, is being absorbed and digested by the star. 
This has happened before, thirty years ago, to that star. 
Why may not our sun also absorb and burn up nebula). But 
if so, what becomes of the rings of the nebular theory? 

The light of the stars is almost the only medium through 
which we can observe them, and it would naturally be sup- 
posed that astronomers would be at pains to have clear views 
of light But the most surprising differences of statement 
regarding it exist among the very first astronomers. They 
do not see it alike Herschel says a Herculis is red ; Struve 
says it is yellow. They dispute about its nature, motion, 
and quantity. Some astronomers believe the sun to be the 
great source of light, at least to our system. But Nasmyth 
informs the Royal Astronomical Society that the true source 
of latent light is not in the solar orb, but in space itself, 
and that the grand function of the sun is to act as an agent 
for the bringing forth into existence the luciferous element, 
which element I suppose to be diffused throughout the 
boundless regions of space. "* The nature of light is how- 
ever still as great a mystery as when Job demanded, "Where 
is the way where light dwelleth? " The undulatory theory 
of light, now generally accepted, assumes that light is 
caused by the vibrations of the ether in a plane transverse 
to the direction of propagation. In order to transmit mo- 
tions of this kind, the parts of the luminiferous medium 
must resist compression and distortion, like those of an elas- 
tic solid body ; its transverse elasticity being great enough 
to transmit one of the most powerful kinds of physical en- 



* Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1852, 119. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH ? 



ergy, with a speed in comparison with which that of the 
swiftest planets of our system is inappreciable, and its lon- 
gitudinal elasticity immensely greater — both of these elas- 
ticities being at the same time so weak as to offer no 
perceptible resistance to the motion of the planets, and 
other visible bodies.* Is the Telocity of light uniform? Or, 
if variable, is the variation caused by the original difference 
of the projectile force of the different suns, stars, comets, 
etc. ? or by the different media through which it passes ? 
Arago alleges that light moves more rapidly through water 
than through air; but Brequet asserts that the fact is just 
the reverse. f Both admit that its velocity varies with the 
medium. Jacobs alleges that during the trigonometrical 
survey of India he observed the extinction of light reflected 
through sixty miles of horizontal atmosphere. X How, then, 
can astronomers make any reliable calculations of the veloc- 
ity of light reaching us through regions of space filled with 
unknown media? Newton calculated the velocity of light 
at one hundred and fifty-five thousand five hundred and 
fifty five and five-ninth miles a second; but Encke shows 
he erred thirty per cent. Other eminent astronomers make 
the time of the passage of light from the sun all the way 
from eleven to fourteen minutes, instead of Newton's seven 
or eight. Busch reckons its velocity at one hundred and 
sixty-seven thousand nine hundred and seventy-six miles; 
Draper one hundred and ninety-two thousand; Struve two 
hundred and fifteen thousand eight hundred and fifty-four. 
Wheatstone alleges that electric light travels at the rate of 
two hundred and eighty-eight thousand miles a second ; but 
Frizeau's calculations and measurements give only one 
hundred and sixty-seven thousand five hundred and twenty - 



* Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1854, 150. 
tCosmos III. 115. 

X Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1860. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



489 



eight for the light of oxygen and hydrogen.* Thus we have" 
a variation of one hundred and twenty thousand miles a 
second in all calculations of sidereal distances. Humboldt 
tries to reconcile these differences by the suggestion, that 
no one will deny, that lights of different magnetic or elec- 
tric processes may have different velocities; a fact which 
throws all sidereal astronomy into inextricable confusion, 
and sets aside all existing time tables on sidereal railroads. 

They are no more agreed as to its composition after it 
reaches us than as to its velocity. Newton taught that it 
consisted of seven colors ; Wallaston denies more than four ; 
Brewster reduces the number to three — red, yellow, and 
blue. Newton measures the yellow and violet, and finds 
them as forty to eighty. Fraunhofer makes the proportion 
twenty-seven to one hundred and nine. Wallaston's spec- 
trum differs from both. Field says, "No one has ventured 
to alter either estimate, and no one who is familiar with the 
spectrum will put much faith in any measurement of it, by 
whosoever and with what care soever made."f He says 
white light is composed of five parts red, three yellow, and 
eight blue ; which differs wholly from Brewster, who gives 
it three parts red, five yellow, and two of blue. 

Equally wild are their calculations of the quantity of 
light emitted by particular stars. Badeau calculates Vul- 
can's light at 2.25 that of Mercury; Lias, from the same 
observations, at 7.36, nearly three times as much. J Sir 
John Herschel calculates that Alpha Centaur i emits more 
light than the sun ; that the light of Sirius is four times as 
great, and its parallax much less; so that by such a calcu- 
lation Sirius would have an intrinsic splendor sixty-three 
times that of the sun. But Wallaston only calculates his 

* Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1852, 139. 
t Annual of Scientific Discovery, 1864, 166. 
J Plurality of Worlds, XII. 



490 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



light at one-fourth, of this amount; and Steinheil makes it 
only one-two-hundredth part of the former estimate.* 

Astronomers have lately been comforting the world with 
the assurance that we have little to fear from comets; that 
the superstitious fear of the comets prevalent in the past 
was ill founded, because comets are so very thin that we 
might pass through one without its breaking up anything. 
But that, as Principal Leitch shows us, is not the only ques- 
tion. " We know that the most deadly miasmata are so 
subtle that it is impossible to detect them by any chemical 
tests, and a very homeopathic dose of a comet, in addition 
to the elements of our own atmosphere, might produce the 
most fatal effects, "f 

The phenomena indicative of cosmical processes are out 
of the range of astronomical observation. We can only 
observe those indicated by light, and gravitation; but how 
small a proportion of the formative processes of our own 
world indicate themselves by these two classes of phenomena ! 
How few of the chemical, vegetative, animal, moral, social, 
or even geological processes, now progressing under our own 
observation, could give us notice of their existence by the 
two channels of light and gravitation? How, then, can 
philosophers ever learn the process of building worlds like 
our own in which many other powers are at work? 

Astronomers are not all agreed as to the existence of a 
cosmical ether ; nor do those who assert it agree as to its 
properties. What is its nature, density, power of refrac- 
tion and reflection of light, and resistance to motion? What 
is its temperature? Is it uniform, or like our atmosphere, 
ever varying? These are manifestly questions indispensable 
to be answered before any theory of the development of 
worlds is even conceivable But of the properties of this 

* North British Eeview, LXV. 
f God's Glory in the Heavens, 168. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



491 



all-extending cosmical atmosphere, which is the very breath 
of life of the development theory, astronomers present the 
most conflicting statements. Professor Vaughan says, "If 
such a body exists, it is beyond our estimation of all that 
is material. It has no weight, according to our idea of 
weight; no resistance, according to our idea of calculating 
resistance by mechanical tests; no volume, on our views of 
volume; no chemical activity, according to our experimental 
and absolute knowledge of chemical action. In plain terms, 
it presents no known re-agency by which it can be isolated 
from surrounding or intervening matter."* Or, in plainer 
terms, we know nothing about it. 

The only fact about it which astronomers have ventured 
to specify and calculate is its temperature ; for upon this 
all the power of the development world-making process de- 
pends. But they are very far from any agreement; indeed, 
they are much farther apart than the equator from the poles. 
Stanley finds the temperature of absolute space — 58° ; 
Arago— 70°; Humboldt— 85° ; Herschel— 132° ; Saigey— 
107°; Poulett, to be exact to a fraction — 223^-° below the 
freezing point; though when it gets to be so cold as that 
one would think he would hardly stay out of doors to meas- 
ure fractions of a degree. But Poisson thinks he is over 
200° too cold, and fixes the temperature accurately, in his 
own opinion, Moreover, he alleges that there is no 

more uniformity in the temperature of the heavens than in 
that of our own atmosphere, owing to the unequal radia- 
tions of heat from the stars; and that the earth, and the 
whole solar system, receive their internal heat from without, 
while passing through hot regions of space. f 

From this chaos of conflicting? assertions of unknown 

o 

facts the theory of development develops itself. Its funda- 



* Annual Scientific Discovery, 1863, 324. 
f Cosmos IY. 378. 



492 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



mental postulate is the difference of temperature between 
the nebulae and the surrounding space. But the fact is that 
nobody knows what is the temperature of either space or 
nebulae, nor is anybody likely ever to know enough of either 
to base any scientific theory upon. Astronomy will never 
teach men how to make worlds ; nor is it of the least conse- 
quence that it does not ; since we could not make them, 
even if we knew how. 

From these specimens of the errors and contradictions of 
the best astronomers, the teachers upon whose accuracy we 
depend for our faith in science, we can see, that though the 
Pope and the Infidel savans may claim infallibility, yet after 
all the savant is just as infallible as the Pope, viz : he is 
right when he is right, and he is wrong when he is wrong, 
and that happens frequently, and common folks can not al- 
ways tell when. There is no such thing, then, as infallible 
science upon faith, in which I can venture to reject God's 
Bible, and risk my soul's salvation. Science is founded on 
faith in very fallible men. 

3. Geology, one of the most recent of the sciences, and 
in the hands of Infidel nurses one of the most noisy, has 
been supposed to be anti-Christian. The supposition is ut- 
terly unfounded. Such of its facts as have been well ascer- 
tained have demonstrated the being, wisdom, and goodness 
of an Almighty Creator, with irresistible evidence. Nor, 
though a wonderful outcry has been raised about the oppo- 
sition between the records of the rocks and the records of 
the Bible, regarding the antiquity of the earth, has any one 
yet succeeded in proving such an opposition, for the plain 
reason that neither the Bible nor geology says how old it 
is They both say it is very old. The Bible says, "In the 
beginning Grod created the heavens and the earth;" and by 
the use which it makes of the word beginning, leaves us to 
infer that it was long before the existence of the human 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



493 



race.* If the geologist could prove that the earth was six 
thousand millions of years older than Adam, it would con- 
tradict no statement of the Bible The Bible reader, there- 
fore, has no reason to question any well ascertained fact of 
geology. But when Infidels come to us with their geolog- 
ical theories about the mode in which God made the earth, 
or in which the earth made itself, and how long it took to 
do it, and tell us that they have got scientific demonstration 
from the rocks that the Bible account is false, and that our 
old traditions can not stand before the irresistible evidence 
of science, we are surely bound to look at the foundation of 
facts, and the logical superstructure, which sustain such 
startling conclusions. 

Now it is remarkable that every Infidel argument against 
the statements of the Bible, or rather against what they 
suppose to be the statements of .the Bible, is based, not on 
the facts, but upon the theories, of geolog} r . I do not know 
one which is based solely on facts and inductions from facts. 
Every one of them has a wooden leg, and goes hobbling upon 
an if. 

Take for example the argument most commonly used — 
that which asserts the vast antiquity of the earth — a thing 
in itself every way likely, and not at all contrary to Scrip- 
ture, if it could be scientifically proved. But how does our 
Infidel geologist set about his work of proving that the 
earth is any given age, say six thousand millions of years? 
A scientific demonstration must rest upon facts — well as- 
certained facts. Tt admits of no suppositions. Now what 
are the facts given to solve the problem of the earth's age? 
The geologist finds a great many layers of rocks, one above 
the other, evidently formed below the water, some of them 
out of the fragments of former rocks, containing bones, 
shells, and casts of fishes, and tracks of the feet of birds, 

* See this proved chapter X., Daylight Before Sunrise. 



494 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



made when these rocks were in the state of soft mud, and 
altogether several miles thick. He has a great multitude 
of such facts before him, but they are all of this character. 
Not one of them gives him the element of time. They an- 
nounce to him a succession of events, such as successive 
generations of fishes and plants ; but not one of them tells 
how long these generations lived. The condition of the 
world was so utterly different then, from what it is now, that 
no inference can be drawn from the length of the lives of 
existing races, which are generally also of different species. 
The utmost any man can say, in such a case, is, / suppose, 
for there is no determinate element of time in the statement 
of the problems, and so no certain time can appear in the 
solution. 

Here is a problem exactly similar A certain house is 
found to be built with ten courses of hewn stone in the 
basement, forty courses of brick in the first story, thirty - 
six courses in the second, thirty-two in the third ; with a 
roof of nine inch rafters covered with inch boards, and an 
inch and a half layer of coal tar and gravel ; how long was 
it in building? Would not any school-boy laugh at the 
absurdity of attempting such a problem? He would say, 
" How can I tell unless I know whence the materials came, 
how they were conveyed, how many workmen were employed, 
and how much each could do in a day? If the brick had 
to be made by hand, the lumber all dressed with the hand- 
saw and jack-plane, the materials all hauled fifty miles in 
r.n ox-cart, the brick carried up by an Irishman in a hod, 
and the work done by an old, slow going, jobbing contractor, 
who could only afford to pay three or four men at a time, 
they would not get through in a year. But if the building 
stone and sand were found in excavating the cellar, if the 
brick were made by steam and came by railroad, a good 
master builder, with steam saw and planing mills, steam 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



495 



hoists, and a strong force of workmen, would run it up in 
three weeks." 

So our geologist ought to say; "I do not know either the 
source of the materials of the earth's strata, nor the means 
by which they were conveyed to their present positions; 
therefore I can not tell the time required for their forma- 
tion. If the crust of the earth was created originally of 
solid granite, and the materials of the strata were ground 
down by the slow action of frost and rain, and conveyed to 
the ocean by the still slower agencies of rivers and torrents 
— hundreds of millions of ages would not effect the work. 
But if the earth was created in such a shape as would ra- 
tionally be considered the best adapted for future stratifica- 
tion ; if its crust consisted of the various elements of which 
granite and other rocks are composed ; if these materials 
were ejected in a granular or comminuted form, and in vast 
quantities by submarine volcanoes generated by the chemi- 
cal action of these elements upon each other; and if, after 
being diffused by the currents of the ocean, and consolidated 
by its vast pressure, the underlying strata were baked and 
melted and crystallized into granite* - a very few centuries 
would suffice. Until these indispensable preliminaries are 
settled, geology can make no calculations of the length of 
time occupied by the formation of the strata." 

But instead of saying so, he imagines that God chose to 
make the earth out' of the most impossible materials, by the 
most unsuitable agencies, and with the most inadequate 
forces; and that therefore a long time was needed for the 
work. In short, to revert to our illustration of the house- 
building, he supposes that Almighty God built the earth 
with the ox-team, and employed only the same force in 

* See the possibility of such a source of volcanic action, of such 
a formation of plutonic rocks, proved by Lyell. Principles, chaps. 
XXXII. and XII. 



496 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



erecting the building, which he now uses for doing little 
jobbing repairs. Almost all geological computations of time 
are made upon the supposition that only the same agents 
were at work then which we see now, that they only wrought 
with the same degree of force, and that they produced just 
the same effects in such a widely different condition of the 
earth as then prevailed. It takes a year say to deposit mud 
enough at the bottom of the sea to make an inch of rock 
now ; and if mud was deposited no faster when the geolog- 
ical strata were formed, they are as many years old as there 
are inches in eight or nine miles depth of strata. But this 
is not the scientific proof we were promised. How does he 
prove that mud was deposited at just the same rate then as 
now? The very utmost he can say is that it is a very prob- 
able supposition. I can prove it a very improbable suppo- 
sition. But it is enough for my present purpose to point 
out that, probable or improbable, it is only supposition. No 
proof is given or can pos.-ibly be given for it. Any conclu- 
sion drawn from such premises can be only a siqiposition too. 
And so the whole fabric of geological chronology, upon the 
stability of which so many Infidels are risking the salvation 
of their souls, and beneath which they are boasting that they 
will bury the Bible beyond the possibility of a resurrection, 
vanishes into a mere unproved notion, based upon an if. 

It is truly astonishing, that any sober-minded person 
should allow himself to be shaken in his religious convic- 
tions by the alleged results of a science so unformed and 
imperfect, as geologists themselves acknowledge their favor- 
ite science to be. " The dry land upon our globe occupies 
only one-fourth of its whole superficies. All the rest is sea. 
How much of this fourth part have geologists been able to 
examine? and how small seems to be the area of stratifica- 
tion which they have explored? We venture to say not one 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



497 



fiftieth part of the whole."* "Abstract or speculative geol- 
ogy, were it a perfect science, would present a history of 
the globe from its origin and formation, through all the 
changes it has undergone, up to the present time; describ- 
ing its external appearance, its plants and animals at each 
successive period. As yet, geology is the mere aim to arrive 
at such knowledge ; and when we consider how difficult it is 
to trace the history of a nation, even over a few centuries, 
we can not be surprised at the small progress geologists have 
made in tracing the history of the earth through the lapse 
of ages. To ascertain the history of a nation possessed of 
written records is comparatively easy ; but when these are 
wanting, we must examine the ruins of their cities and mon- 
uments, and judge of them as a people from the size and 
structure of their buildings, and from the remains of art 
found in them. This is often a perplexing, always an ardu- 
ous task; much more so is it to decipher the earth's history. "f 
" The canoes, for example, and stone hatchets found in our 
peat bogs afford an insight into the rude arts and manners 
of the earliest inhabitants of our island; the buried coin 
fixes the date of some Roman emperor; the ancient en- 
campments indicate the districts once occupied by invad- 
ing armies, and the former method of constructing military 
defenses ; the Egyptiam mummies throw light on the art of 
embalming, the rites of sepulture, or the average stature of 
ancient Egypt. This class of memorials yields to no other 
in authenticity, but it constitutes a small part only of the 
resources on which the historian relies ; whereas in geology 
it forms the only kind of evidence which is at our command. 
For this reason we must not expect to obtain a full and con- 
nected account of any series of events beyond the reach of 

* Sir David Brewster, K. EL, D. C. L., F. K. S., More Worlds than 
One, p. 56. 

f Rudiments of Geology, "W. & E. Chambers, p. 10. 
32 



498 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH ? 



history."* "There are no calculations more doubtful than 
those of the geologist."f In fact, no truly scientific geolo- 
gist pretends that it stands on the same level with any au- 
thentic history, much less with the Bible record; inasmuch 
as the discovery of a single new fact may overturn the whole 
theory. "It furnishes us with no clew by which to unravel 
the unapproachable mysteries of creation. These mysteries 
belong to the wondrous Creator, and to him only. We at- 
tempt to theorize upon them, and to reduce them to law, 
and all nature rises up against us in our presumptuous re- 
bellion. A stray splinter of cone bearing wood — a fish's 
skull or tooth — the vertebra of a reptile — the humerus of a 
bird — the jaw of a quadruped — all, any of these things, 
weak and insignificant as they may seem, become in such a 
quarrel too strong for us and our theory — the puny frag- 
ment in the grasp of truth forms as irresistible a weapon as 
the dry bone did in that of Samson of old ; and our slaugh- 
tered sophisms lie piled up, 'heaps upon heaps,' before it."J 
The history of the progress of geology furnishes abundant 
proof of the truth of these admissions of weakness and fal- 
libility. In almost every instance when we have had the 
opportunity of testing geological calculations of time they 
have proved to be erroneous; and sometimes grossly erro- 
neous. The lake dwellings of Switzerland, which were once 
alleged to be at least fifteen thousand years old, are found 
surrounded by heaps of burnt corn; illustrating Caesar's 
account of the burning of their corn by the Helvetians, 
preparatory to the invasion of Gaul, which he repelled. The 
peat bogs of Denmark, surrounding stumps of oak, beech, 
and pine, claimed to be successive growths, and at least 
twelve thousand five hundred years old, have been compared 

* Lyell's Principles of Geology, p. 3. 

f Miller, Old Red Sandstone, p. 25. 

% Hugh Miller, Footprints of the Creator, p. 313. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



499 



with a piece of primeval bog and forest, on the Earl of 
Arran's estate, in Scotland, which corresponds perfectly to 
the Danish bog; but which shows the three growths not 
successive, but contemporaneous, at different levels; the 
bog growing as well as the trees. And the frequent discovery 
of Danish remains of the stone and bronze ages in the old 
Danish forts and battle-fields of Ireland fixes their histor- 
ical period at the era of the Danish invasion ; some of these 
stone and bronze weapons being found on the battle-field of 
Clontarf, dating A. D. 827. Skeletons of warriors with 
gold collars, bronze battle-axes, and flint arrow heads are 
quite common in the Irish bogs. The absence of iron, on 
which so great a theory of the stone, bronze, and iron ages 
as successive developments of civilization has been raised, 
is easily accounted for by the perishable nature of iron 
when exposed to moisture. But that this Celtic race used 
iron also, as well as bronze and stone, is proved incontestably 
by the discovery, in 1863, of the slag of their iron furnaces, 
among a number of flint weapons, and Celtic skulls, at Lin- 
hope, in Northumberland; the iron itself having perished 
by rust * The pottery, glass, and handmills found beside 
these skulls show that their owners were by no means the 
degraded savages supposed to represent the so-called stone 
age. 

Horner's Nile pottery, discovered at a depth of sixty feet, 
and calculated to be twelve thousand years old, and frag- 
ments found still deeper in this deposit, and calculated at 
thirty thousand years, were found to be underlaid by still 
deeper layers, producing Roman pottery; and in the deep- 
est boring of all, at the foot of the statue of Rameses II. 
the discovery of the Grecian honeysuckle, marked on some 
of these mysterious fragments, which they had claimed as 

* American Cyclopaedia, 1863, p. 374. Annual of Scientific Dis- 
covery, 1861, p. 351. 



500 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



pre-historic, proved that it could not be older than the 
Greek conquest of Egypt. Sir Robert Stephenson found 
in the neighborhood of Damietta, at a greater depth than 
Mr. Horner reached, a brick bearing the stamp of Moham- 
med Ali.* The shifting currents of all rivers flowing 
through alluvial deposits bury such things in a single sea- 
son of high water. 

The raised beaches of Scotland are quite conspicuous 
geological features of the Highlands, and have furnished 
themes for calculations of their vast antiquity. Here and 
there human remains had been discovered in them, but no 
link could be had to connect them otherwise than geologic- 
ally with history. Geologists, accordingly, with their usual 
generosity of time, assigned them to the pre-Adamite period. 
But recently the missing link has been found, and these 
progenitors of Tubal Cain, and the pre-Adamites generally, 
are found to have been in the habit of supping their broth 
out of Roman pottery ! 

Lyell, the acknowledged prince of geologists, is famous 
for his chronological blundering ; of which his calculations 
of the age of the delta of the Mississippi is a very good 
American example. He calculates the quantity of mud in 
suspension in the water, and the area and depth of the delta, 
and says it must have taken sixty-seven thousand years for 
the formation of the whole; and if the alluvial matter of 
the plain above be two hundred and sixty-four feet deep, or 
half that of the delta, it must have required thirty-three 
thousand five hundred years more for its accumulation, even 
if its area be estimated at only equal to the delta, whereas 
it is in fact larger.f He makes no allowance for tidal de- 
posits. 

But Brig. Gen. Humphrey, of the United States Surveying 

* London Quarterly Eeview, 1866, No. 51, p. 240. 
t Lyell's Second Visit to the United States. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



501 



Department, goes over Lyell's calculations, and shows that 
instead of 3,702,758,400 cubic feet of mud brought down 
by the Mississippi, as estimated by Lyell, the actual amount 
is 19,500,750,000,000; that the rate at which the delta is 
now advancing into the gulf is fifty feet per annum, and 
that the age of the delta and alluvial deposit is four thou- 
sand four hundred, instead of Lyell's one hundred thousand 
five hundred years * We might go on and give a dozen 
such instances of geological miscalculations of time did 
space permit; but these are enough to disabuse us of any 
faith in such calculations. 

With such specimens before us of the miscalculations of 
the smaller periods by geologists, we are not surprised to 
find that they grossly exaggerate the larger cycles of time. 
The necessities of the evolution of the ascidian into the 
snail, of the snail into the fish, and of the fish into the liz- 
ard, of the lizard into the monkey, and of the monkey into 
the man, by slow and imperceptible changes, demanded an 
almost infinite length of time; and the geologists of that 
school accordingly asserted the existence of animal life 
upon our globe for hundreds of thousands of millions of 
years. 

But Sir Wm. Thompson, one of the first mathematicians, 
demonstratesf the impossibility of any such length of time 
being spent in the process of cooling our little globe Be- 
ginning with their own assumption, of a globe of molten 
granite cooling down to the present state, he proves that 
the earth can not have been in existence longer than a hun- 
dred millions of years; and of course that plants and ani- 
mals have existed on it a much shorter time; as for the 
greater part of that period it was too hot for them. The 
geologists are now becoming ashamed of their poetical cycles, 



* The Advance, Chicago, May 28, 1868. 
f Geological Time. 



502 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



and some acknowledge that their chiefs blundered egregi- 
ously in their calculations. 

The principles of geology seem to be as unsettled as its 
facts. There is no agreement upon any of its theories. The 
history of its theories, like that of their framers, begins 
with their birth, and ends with their burial. Each new 
theory placed the tombstone upon the preceding, and in- 
scribed it with the brief record of the antediluvian, "and 
he died." A busy time they must have had with their 
Wernerian, Huttonian, and Diluvian hypotheses; not to 
mention the Hutchinsonian theory, the animal spirits flow- 
ing from the sun, the vegetative power of stones, and other 
sage and serious facts and theories, theological and philoso- 
phical, invented to account for the world's creation. "No 
theory," says Lyell, "could be so far-fetched or fantastical 
as not to attract some followers, provided it fell in with the 
popular notion." "Some of the most extravagant systems 
were invented or controverted by men of acknowledged 
talent." A more amusing exhibition of philosophical ab- 
surdity can not be found than those chapters which he de- 
votes to "The Historical Progress of Geology,"* unless 
perhaps the scientific discussions of the erudite acquaint- 
ances of Lemuel Gulliver. 

Let it not be supposed that the progress of inductive 
science, and the prevalence of the Baconian philosophy 
have banished absurdities and contradictions from the sphere 
of geology. It would require a man of considerable learn- 
ing to find three geologists agreed, either in their facts, or 
in their theories. In a general way, indeed, we have the 
Catastrophists, with Hugh Miller, overwhelming the earth 
with dire convulsions in the geological eras, and upheaving 
the more conservative Lyell and the Progressionists; who 
affirm that all things continue as they were from the begin- 



* Principles, Chaps. III. and IV. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



503 



ning of the world. And there is perhaps a general agree- 
ment now that the underlying primitive rocks, so called, 
are not primitive at all, as geologists thought twenty years 
ago ; but, like the foundations of a Chicago house, have been 
put in long after the building was finished and occupied. 
Bat then comes the question how they were inserted — 
whether as Elie de Beaumont thinks, the mountains were 
upheaved by starts, lever fashion, or, as Lyell affirms, very 
gradually, and imperceptibly, like the elevation of a brick 
house by screws * Nor is there the least likelihood of any 
future agreement among them ; inasmuch as they can not 
agree either as to the thickness of the earth's solid crust 
which is to be lifted, or the force by which it is to be done? 
Hopkins proves by astronomical observation that it is eight 
hundred miles thick. Lyell affirms that at twenty-four 
miles deep there can be no solid crust, for the temperature 
of the earth increases one degree for every forty-five feet, 
and at that depth the heat is great enough to melt iron and 
almost every known substance. But then there is a differ- 
ence between philosophers about this last test of solidity — 
those who believe in Weclgewood's Pyrometer, which was 
the infallible standard twenty years ago, asserting that the 
heat of melted iron is 21,000° Fahrenheit; while Professor 
Daniells demonstrates by another infallible instrument that 
it is only 2,786° Fahrenheit ;f which is rather a difference. 
In one case the earth's crust would be over two hundred 
miles thick, in the other twenty-four. But then comes the 
great question, What is below the granite? and a very im- 
portant one for any theory of the earth. It evidently un- 
derlies the whole foundation of speculative geology, whether 
we assume with De Beaumont and Humboldt, that "the 
whole globe, with the exception of a thin envelope, much 

* Principles, chap. XI. 
f Principles, p. 530. 



504 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



thinner in proportion than the shell of an egg, is a fused 
mass, kept fluid by heat — a heat of 450,000° Fahrenheit, at 
the center, Cordier calculates — but constantly cooling, and 
contracting its dimensions;" and occasionally cracking and 
falling in, and "squeezing upward large portions of the 
mass;" "thus producing those folds or wrinkles which we 
call mountain chains;" or, with Davy and Lyell, that the 
heat of such a boiling ocean below would melt the solid 
crust, like ice from the surface of boiling water — and with 
it the whole theory of the primeval existence of the earth 
in a state of igneous fusion, its gradual cooling down into 
continents and mountains of granite, the gradual abrasion 
of the granite into the mud and sand which formed the 
stratified rocks, and all the other brilliant hypotheses which 
have sparked out of this great internal fire. Instead of an 
original central heat he supposes that "we may perhaps re- 
fer the heat of the interior to chemical changes constantly 
going on in the earth's crust."* Now if the very founda- 
tions of the science are in such a state of fusion, and float- 
ing on a perhaps, would it not be wise to allow them to 
solidify a little before a man risks the salvation of his soul 
upon them? 

The various theories are contradictions. The igneous 
theory assault the aqueous theory with the greatest heat; 
while the aqueous theorists pour cold water, in torrents, 
upon the igneous men. The shocks of conflicting glacier 
theories have shaken the Alps and convulsed all North 
America; and have not yet ceased. There are eleven the 
ories of earthquakes, which have been, and are still, suck 
energetic agents in geology; and the whole eleven afford 
not the least rational idea of their causes; nor of any means 
of preventing, predicting, or escaping their ravages. The 
best geologists have described fossil tracks as the footprints 

* Principles, chap. XXXI. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH ? 



505 



of gigantic birds, which others equally as authoritative pro • 
nounce the tracks of frogs and lizards. Indeed, a good 
part of every geological treatise, and of the time of every 
association of geologists, is taken up with refutations of the 
errors of their predecessors. 

There are no less than nine theories of the causes of the 
elevation of mountains; some scoop out the valleys by 
water; others by ice; others heave up the mountains by 
fire; and some by the chemical expansion of their rocks; 
while others still upheave them by the pressure of molten 
lava from beneath ; and others again make them out to be 
the wrinkles of the contraction of the supposed crust of 
the liquid interior. Of all these theories an able geologist 
says: "The many proposed theories of mountain elevation 
are based upon assumptions which unfortunately are not 
true; but that is an unimportant matter to the majority of 
our speculating geologists ; and one never seen by the in- 
ventors of the theories, who allow themselves to be led cap- 
tive by a poetic imagination, instead of building their in- 
ductions upon field observations. 

" Thus, to suppose that mountains are elevated by a wedge 
like intrusion of melted matter is to give to a fluid func- 
tions incompatible with its dynamic properties. So also the 
supposition that the igneous rocks were intruded, as solid 
wedges separating and lifting the crust, is opposed to the 
fact that no apparent abrasion, but generally the closest 
adhesion, exists at the line of contact of the igneous and 
stratified rocks. Equally fatal objections may be advanced 
against the other theories."* 

Multitudes of the alleged facts of Infidel geologists are 
as apocryphal as their theories. Thus in a recent ponder- 
ous quarto volume, the production of half a dozen philoso- 
phers, this identical impossible theory-— of the cooling of 



* Chambers' Cyclopaedia Art. Appalachians. 



506 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



the earth's crust down to solidity, while an irresistible cen- 
tral heat remains below — is presented to the world as an 
ascertained fact; we are informed of the discovery of a 
human skull fifty-seven thousand years old, in good preser- 
vation; asked to believe that two tiers of cypress snags 
could not be deposited in the delta of the Mississippi in less 
than eleven thousand four hundred years ; and to calculate 
that the delta of the Nile must have been a great many ages 
in growing to its present size, because it is quite certain 
that for the last three thousand years it has never grown at 
all* 

It were easy to fill a volume with such mistakes of geolo- 
gists, but my limits restrict me to a few specimens. Silli- 
man's Journal, in a review of "The Geology of North Amer- 
ica, by Julius Marcoe, U. S. Geologist, and Professor of 
Geology in the Federal Polytechnic School of Switzerland ; 
quarto, with maps and plates," says: 

" The author describes the mountain systems of north 
America as he supposes they must be, according to the theo- 
retical views of Elie de Beaumont." "Thus one single 
fossil — that one a species of pine, and only very much re-, 
sembling the Pinites Fleurotti of Dr. Monguett — establishes 
a connection between the New Red of France, and that 
of America This is a very strong word for a geologist to 
use on evidence so small, and so uncertain, with the fate of 
four thousand or five thousand feet of rock at stake, and 
the beds beneath, containing 'perhaps Belemnites.' The 
prudent observer would have said, establishes nothing; and 
such is the fact." "On such evidence a region over the 
Piocky Mountains, which is one thousand miles from north 
to south, and eight hundred miles from east to west, is for 
the most part colored in the maps as Triassic. Such a re- 
gion would take in quite a respectable part of the continent 



* Types of Mankind, 329, 335 7 338. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



507 



of Europe." "We now know beyond any reasonable doubt, 
that all the country from the Platte to the British Posses- 
sions, and from the Mississippi to the Black Hills, is occu- 
pied by Cretaceous and Tertiary rocks. And as regards 
the region from the Platte southward to the Red River, 
very far the largest part is known to be not Triassic, while it 
is possible the Trias may occur in some parts of it." "It 
is unfortunate in its bearing on the progress of geological 
science to have false views about some five hundred thou- 
sand miles of territory, and much more besides, spread widely 
abroad through respectable journals, and transactions of dis- 
tinguished European Societies.* 

One can not but sympathize with the poor abused Rocky 
Mountains, tormented and misrepresented for a thousand 
miles by this French geologist. But our American patriotism 
may be partially pacified when we find that Europe fares no 
better; and that Great Britain, and Old Scotland, Hugh 
Miller's own cradle, which has been the very lecture room 
of geologists, has nevertheless been most grossly misrepre- 
sented in all books and maps, up till the last decade. The 
Edinburgh Review, a competent authority, says (No. exxvii.) ; 
"'The new light which has been thus thrown on the history 
of the geological series of Scotland (by Sir Roderick Mur- 
chison), showing that great masses of' crystalline rocks, 
called primary, and supposed to be much more ancient than 
the Silurian system, are here simply metamorphosed strata 
of that age, may with justice be looked upon as one of the 
most valuable results which have been attained by British 
geologists for many years."' A very just remark indeed! 
If only geologists would learn a little modesty from this 
discovery, which completely turns upside down their old 
world-building process of grinding down all the upper strata 



* The American Journal of Science and Art, edited by Profs. 
Silliman and Dana, XXVI. 235, 300. 



508 



SCIENCE, OR FAITII ? 



out of the molten granite, and gives us, instead, the baking 
of the strata into crystalline rocks ; a process exactly the re- 
verse of the former, and of that asserted by the theory of 
evolution. There is no prospect of any cessation of the 
war of geological theories. 
■ 4. Zoology. 

Equally hostile to each other are the expounders of the 
development of man from the monkey. As Ishmaelites 
their hand is against every man. Each is a law in theoriz- 
ing unto himself Their contendings may well teach us 
caution. Lamarek set those right who preceded him. The 
author of the Vestiges of Creation outstripped Lamarek, 
and Mr. Darwin sets both aside ; while he in his turn is se- 
verely censured by M. Tremaux, and has all his reasoning 
controverted in favor of the new theory. Lamarek believed 
in spontaneous generation ; Darwin does not. The author 
of the Vestiges of Creation expounded a law of develop- 
ment, and Mr. Darwin replaces it by Natural Selection. M. 
Tremaux has repudiated the origin which Mr. Darwin has 
assumed, and insists on our believing that, not water, but 
the soil, is the origin of all life, and therefore of man. With 
him there is no progress; all creatures have reached their 
resting place. But man rises or sinks, according to the 
more ancient or recent soil he dwells upon. Professor 
Huxley is unwilling to abandon his idea that life may come 
from dead matter, and is not disposed to accept of Mr. Dar- 
win's explanation of the origin of life by the Creator hav- 
ing, at first, breathed it into one or more forms. While 
accepting of Mr Darwin's theory of a common descent for 
man with all other creatures, he not only differs from him 
as to the beginning, but he admits that there is no gradual 
transition from the one to the other. He acknowledges that 
the structural differences between man and even the high- 
est apes are great and significant ; and yet because there is 
no sign of gradual transition between the gorilla, and the 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



509 



orang, and the gibbon, he infers that they all had a common 
origin ; whereas the more natural conclusion from the facts 
would be that they had separate beginnings Mr. Wallace, 
whose claims are admitted to be equal to these of Mr. Darwin, 
as the propounder of the theory of the origin of species by 
Natural Selection, has firmly asserted that, with all its re- 
sources, Natural Selection is utterly inadequate to account for 
the origin and structure of the human race.* Thus they go, 
biting and devouring each other, until at last it becomes a 
reproduction of the Kilkenny cats, and there is nothing 
left but the tails. We have only to wait, and the current 
Infidel theory will certainly be exposed and demolished next 
year, by the author of some equally impossible theory. 

Not merely individual scientists, but the most learned 
societies have blundered. "Has not the French Academy 
pronounced against the use of quinine and vaccination, 
against lightning rods and steam engines? Has not Reau- 
mer suppressed Peysonnel's ' Essay on Corals,' because he 
thought it was madness to maintain their animal nature? 
Had not his learned brethren decreed, in 1802, that there 
were no meteors, although a short time later two thousand 
fell in one department alone ; and had they not more recently 
still received the news of ether being useful as an anaesthetic 
with sure and unanimous condemnation?"")" 

If space permitted we could go over the circle of the 
sciences, and show that a similar state of uncertainty and 
exposure to error exists in them all. We have, however, 
confined our attention to those whose certainty is now most 
loudly vaunted, and whose theories are most largely used as 
the basis of Infidelity. Nor have we by any means ex- 
hausted the list of errors and contradictions of these. A 
volume as large as this would be required to present the 



* Prazer — Blending Lights, p. 113. 
j- De Vore's Modern Magic, 58. 



510 



5GEE9GB. OR FAITH ? 



list of several hundred errors, absurdities, contradictions, 
and mutual refutations of scientists, in the physical sciences, 
now before me ; errors not sought after, but incidentally 
observed, and noted in the spare hours' reading of a busy 
professional life. 

It is worthy of notice, that the uncertainties of science 
increase just in proportion to our interest in it. It is very 
uncertain about all my dearest concerns, and very positive 
about what does not concern me The greatest certainty is 
attainable in pure mathematics, which regards only ideal 
quantities and figures: but biology — the science of life — is 
utterly obscure. The astronomer can calculate with con- 
siderable accuracy the movements of distant planets, with 
which we have no intercourse; but where is the meteorolo- 
gist bold enough to predict the wind and weather of next 
week, on which my crops, my ships, my life may depend? 
Heat, light, and electricity may be pretty accurately meas- 
ured and registered, but what physician can measure the 
strength of the malignant virus which is sapping the life of 
his patient ? The chemist can thoroughly analyze any for- 
eign substance, but the disease of his own body which is 
bringing him to the grave, he can neither weigh, measure 
nor remove. Science is very positive about distant stars 
and remote ages, but stammers and hesitates about the very 
lLe of its professors. 

4. Such. then, are a few of the uncertainties, imperfec- 
tions, and pos'tive and egregious errors of science at its 
fountain head. To the actual investigator infallible cer- 
tainty of any scientific fact is hardly possible, error exceed- 
ingly probable, and gross blunders in fact and theory by no 
means uncommon. But how greatly diluted must the modi- 
fied and hesitating conviction possible to an actual observer 
become, when, as is generally the case, a man is not an 
actual observer himself, but haras his science at school. 
Such a person leaves the ground of demonstrative science, 



SCIENCE-, OR FAITH? 



511 



and stands upon faith. The first question then to be pro- 
posed to one whose demonstrative certainty of the truths 
of physical science has disgusted him with a religion re- 
ceived on testimony and faith, is, How have you reached 
this demonstrative certainty in matters of science? Are 
you quite sure that your certainty rests not upon the tes- 
timony of fallible and erring philosophers, but solely upon 
your own personal observations and experiments? 

To take only the initial standard of astronomical meas- 
urements — the earth's distance from the sun Have you 
personally measured the earth's radius, observed the transit 
of Venus in 1769, from Lapland to Tahiti at the same time, 
calculated the sun's parallax, and the eccentricity of the 
earth's orbit? Would you profess yourself competent to 
take even the preliminary observation for fixing the instru- 
ments for such a reckoning? Were you ever within a 
thousand miles of the proper positions for making such ob- 
servations ? Or have you been necessitated to accept this 
primary measure, upon the accuracy of which all subsequent 
astronomical measurers depend, merely upon hearsay and 
testimony, and subject to all those contingencies of error 
and prejudice, and mistakes of copyists, which, in your 
opinion, render the Bible so unreliable in matters of relig- 
ion ? 

Or to come down to earth You are a student of the 
stone book, with its enduring records graven in the rock 
forever ; and perhaps have satisfied yourself that " under 
the ponderous strata of geological science the traditionary 
mythology and cosmogony of the Hebrew poet has found 
an everlasting tomb." But how many volumes of this 
stone book have you perused personally ? You are quite 
indignant perhaps that theologians and divines, who have 
no practical or personal knowledge of geology, should pre- 
sume to investigate its claims. Have you personally visited 
the various localities in South America, Siberia, Australia, 



512 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



India, Britain, Italy, and the South Seas, where the various 
formations are exhibited ; and have you personally excavated 
from their matrices the various fossils which form the hie- 
roglyphics of the science ? Have you, in fact, ever seen one 
in a thousand of these minerals and fossils in situ? Or are 
you dependent on the tales of travelers, the specimens of 
collectors, the veracity of authors, the accuracy of lectu- 
rers, aided by maps of ideal stratifications, in rose-pink, 
brimstone-yellow, and indigo-blue, for your profound and 
glowing convictions of the irresistible force of experimental 
science, and of the shadowy vagueness of a religion depend- 
ent upon human testimony ? 

To come down considerably in our demands, and confine 
ourselves to the narrow limits of the laboratory. You are 
a chemist perhaps, and proud, as most chemists justly are, 
of the accuracy attainable in that most palpable and dem- 
onstrative science. But how much of it is experimental 
science to you? How many of the nine hundred and forty- 
two substances treated of in Turner's Chemistry have 
you analyzed? One-half? One-tenth? Would you face 
the laughter of a college class to morrow upon the experi- 
ment of taking nine out of the nine hundred, reducing 
them to their primitive elements, giving an accurate analysis 
of their component parts, and combining them in the various 
forms described in that, or any other book, whose state- 
ments, because experimentally certain, have filled you with 
a dislike of Bible truths, which you must receive upon 
testimony? In fact, do you know anything worth mention 
of the facts of science upon your own knowledge, except 
those of the profession by which you make your living? 

Or, after all your boasting about scientific and demon- 
strative certainty, have you been obliged to receive the cer- 
tainties of science "upon faith, and at second-hand, and 
upon the word of another; " and to save your life you could 
not tell half the time who that other is, by naming the dis- 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH ? 



513 



coverers of half the scientific truths you believe? What! 
are you dependent on hearsay, and probability, for any lit- 
tle science you possess, having in fact never obtained any 
personal demonstration or experience of its first principles 
and measurements, nor being capable of doing so? Then 
let us hear no more cant about the uncertainty of a relig on 
dependent upon testimony, and the certainties of experimental 
science. Whatever certainty may be attainable by scien- 
tific men — and we have seen that is not much — it is very 
certain you have got none of it. The very best you can 
have to wrap yourself in is a second-hand assurance, griev- 
ously torn by rival schools, and needing to be patched every 
month by later discoveries. Your science, such as it is, 
rests solely upon faith in the testimony of philosophers, 
often contradictory and improbable, and always fallible and 
uncertain. 

5. Nor would you cease to be dependent upon faith could 
you personally make all the observations and calculations of 
demonstrative science. The knowledge of these facts does 
not constitute science; it is merely the brick pile containing 
the materials for the building of science. Science is knowl- 
edge systematized. But if the parts of nature were not 
arranged after a plan, the knowledge of them could not be 
formed into a system. Chaos is unintelligible. Our minds 
are so constituted that we look for order and regularity, and 
can not comprehend confusion. We possess this expecta- 
tion of order before we begin to learn science, and without 
it would never begin the search after a system of knowl- 
edge. All scientific experiment is but a search after order, 
and order is only another name for intelligence — for God. 
Deprive us of this fundamental faith in cause and effect, 
order and regularity — of reason, in short — and science be- 
comes as impossible to man as to the orang-outang. All 
science, even in its first principles, rests upon faith. 
33 



514 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



Not only science, reason, also, is founded upon faith ; for 
we can not prove by reason the truths which form the data 
of reasoning. The intuitions of the mind, which form the 
postulates necessary to the first process of reasoning, are 
believed, not proven. When the wise fool attempted to 
prove his own existence by the celebrated sophism, " I think, 
therefore I exist," he necessarily postulated his existence 
in order to prove it. How did he know that there was an 
"I" to think? And how did he know that the "I" thought? 
Certainly not by any process of reasoning, but by faith. He 
believed these truths; but could never reason them into 
his consciousness. Faith, then, underlies reason itself. 

We may now proceed to inquire whether or not faith, 
which we have found so prevalent even among those who 
repudiate it, is a thing to be ashamed of ; or if it be a suffi- 
ciently certain and reliable basis for human life and conduct. 

1. We are met at the very outset by the great fact that 
God has so constituted the world and everything in it, that 
in all the great concerns of life we are necessitated to depend 
on faith; without any possibility of reaching absolute cer- 
tainty regarding the result of any ordinary duty. We sow 
without any certainty of a crop, or that we may live to reap 
it. We harvest, but our barns may be burned down. We 
sell our property for bank-bills, but who dare say they will 
ever be paid in specie? We start on a journey to a distant 
city, but even though you insure your life, who will insure 
that fire, or flood, or railroad collision may not send you to 
the land whence there is no return? 

Science is the child of yesterday; but from the begin- 
ning of the world men have lived by faith. Before science 
was born, Cain tilled his ground without any mathematical 
demonstration that he should reap a crop. Abel fed his 
flock without any scientific certainty that he should live to 
enjoy its produce; and Tubal Cain forged axes and swords 
without any assurance that he should not be plundered of 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



515 



liis wages. All the experience of mankind proves that ex- 
perimental certainty regarding the most important business 
of this life is impossible. By what process of philosophical 
induction is religion alone put beyond the sphere of faith 
and hope? If religious duties are not binding on us, un- 
less religion be scientifically demonstrated, then neither are 
moral obligations; for these two can not be separated. Is 
it really so, that none but scientific men are bound to tell 
the truth, and pay their debts; and that a person may not 
fear God, and go to heaven, unless he has graduated at col- 
lege? The common sense of mankind declares that we live 
by faith, not by science. 

2. We demand the knowledge of truths of which science 
is profoundly ignorant. Science is but an outlying nook of 
my farm, which I may neglect and yet have bread to eat. 
Faith is my house in which all my dearest interests are 
treasured. Of all the great problems and precious inter- 
ests which belong to me as a mortal and an immortal, science 
knows nothing. I ask her whence I came? and she points 
to her pinions scorched over the abyss of primeval fire, her 
eyes blinded by its awful glare, and remains silent I in- 
quire what I am? but the strange and questioning I is a 
mystery which she can neither analyze nor measure. I tell 
her of the voice of conscience within me — she never heard 
it, and does not pretend to understand its oracles. I tell 
her of my anxieties about the future — she is learned only 
in the past I inquire how I may be happy hereafter — but 
happiness is not a scientific term, and she can not tell me 
how to be happy here ! Poor, blind science ! 

3. All our dearest interests lie beyond the domains of science, 
in the regions of faith. Science treats of things — faith is 
confidence in persons. Take away the persons, and of what 
value are the things? The world becomes at once a vast 
desert, a dreary solitude, and more miserable than any of 
its former inhabitants the lonely wretch who is left to mourn 



516 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



over the graves of all his former companions — the last man. 
Solitary science were awful. Could I prosecute the toils of 
study alone, without companion or friend to share my labors? 
Would I study eternally with no object, and for no use ; 
none to be benefited, none to be gratified by my discoveries? 
Though you hung maps on every tree, made every moun- 
tain range a museum, bored mines in every valley, and cov- 
ered every plain with specimens, made Vesuvius my cruci- 
ble, and opened the foundations of the earth to my view — 
yet would the discovery of a single fresh human footprint in 
the sand fill my heart with more true hope of happiness, than 
an endless eternity of solitary science. I can live, and love, 
and be happy without science, but not loithout companion- 
ship, whose bond is faith. 

Faith is the condition of all the happiness you can know 
on earth. Law, order, government, civilization, and family 
life, depend not upon science, but upon confidence in moral 
character — upon faith. In its sunshine alone can happiness 
grow. It is faith sends you out in the morning to your 
work, nerves your arms through the toils of the day, brings 
you home in the evening, gathers your wife and your chil- 
dren around your table, inspires the oft-repea f ed efforts of 
the little prattler to ascend your knee, clasps his chubby 
arms around your neck, looks with most confiding inno- 
cence in your eye, and puts forth his little hand to catch 
your bread, and share your cup. Undoubting faith is hap- 
piness even here below. Need you marvel, then, that you 
must be converted from your pride of empty, barren science, 
and casting yourself with all your powers into the arms of 
faith, become as a little child before you can enter into the '■ 
kingdom of heaven? 

4. But religion is not founded upon faith as distinct from 
observation and experiment. It is the most experimental of 
all the sciences. There is less of theory, and more of ex- 
perience in it than in any other science. Its faith is all 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



517 



practical. It is a great mistake to suppose that faith is the 
opposite pole of experience. On the contrary, experience 
is the fruit which ripens from the blossom of faith. We 
have seen how an underlying conviction of the existence 
of an intelligent planner and upholder of the laws of 
nature is the source of all scientific experiment, and syste- 
matized knowledge. A similar underlying conviction of the 
existence of a moral governor of the world is the source of 
all religious experience. He that cometh to God must be- 
lieve that he is, and that he is the rewarder of those that 
diligently seek him. But this fundamental axiom believed, 
long trains of experience follow; of every one of which you 
can be, and actually are, infinitely more certain than of any 
fact of physical science. Your eyes, your ears, your touch, 
your instruments, your reason, may be deceived ; but your 
consciousness can not. If your soul is filled with joy, that 
is a fact. You know it, and are as sure of it as you are that 
the sun shines. If you feel miserable, you are so. A sense 
of neglected duty, a consciousness that you have done 
wrong, and are displeased with yourself for it ; a certainty 
that Grod is displeased with you for wrong doing, and that 
he will show his d'spleasure by suitable punishment ; the 
tenacious grasp of vicious habits on your body and soul, 
and the fearful thought that by the law of your nature 
these vipers, which you vainly struggle to shake off, will for- 
ever keep involving you more closely in their cursed coils — 
these are facts of your experience You are as certain that 
they give you disquiet of mind, when you entertain them, 
as that the sea rages in a tempest ; and that you can no 
more prevent their entrance, nor compel their departure, 
nor calm nor drown the anxiety they occasion, than you can 
prevent the rising of the tempest, dismiss the thunder- 
storm, or drown Etna in your wine-glass. Of these primary 
facts of moral science, and of others like them, you possess 
the most absolute and infallible certainty from your own 



518 SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 

consciousness. They result from the inertia of moral mat- 
ter, which, when put into a state of disturbance, has no 
power of bringing itself to rest ; as expressed in the form- 
ula, There is no peace, saiih my God, to the wicked* 

Let us now go out of your own experience, as you must 
do in every other science, into the region of observation, 
and study a few of the other phenomena of religion. Your 
comrade, Jones, has taken to drinking of late, and also to 
going with you to Sunday lectures, and in the evening to 
other places of amusement. He has, however, been warned 
that the next time he comes drunk to the workshop he will 
be discharged ; and as he is a clever young fellow, and 
knows more about the Bible than you, having gone to Sab- 
bath-school when a boy, and is able to use up the saints 
cleverly, you would be sorry to lose his company. So you 
set on him to go with you to hear a temperance lecture, 
hoping that he may be induced to take the pledge ; for if 
he does not you fear he will soon lie in the gutter. He 
curses you, and himself too, if ever he listens to any such 
stuff; and refuses to go. You can easily gather a hundred 
other illustrations of the great law of the moral repulsion 
between vice and truth, expressed in the following formula : 
" This is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, 
and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds 
were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, 
neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds shoidd be reproved •."f 
Your life, however, is but a long illustration of this princi- 
ple. Have you not willingly remained in ignorance of the 
contents of the Bible, because you dislike its commands ? 

There is another fact of the same science — there, in the 
gutter before you, wallowing in his own vomit, covered with 
rags, besmeared with mud, smelling worse than a hog, his 



* Isaiah, chap, xlviii. 22. 
t John, chap. iii. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



519 



bruised and bleeding mouth unable to articulate the ob- 
scenities and curses he tries to utter. " Ts it possible that 
can be Bill Brown ! Why, only three years ago we worked 
at the same bench. It was he who introduced me to the 
Sunday Institute ; as clever a workman and as jovial a com- 
rade as I ever knew, but would get on a spree now and 
again He had a good father and mother, got considerable 
schooling, had good wages, got married to a clever girl, and 
had two fine children. Is it possible he could make such a 
beast of himself in such a short time?" Yes, quite possi- 
ble, and more, quite certain. Not only in his case, but in 
all others, the law of moral gravitation is universal and in- 
fallible. "Evil men and seducers wax worse and, worse."* 
The degradation may not always be in this precise form, nor 
always as speedy; as all heavy bodies do not fall to the 
same place, nor with like rapidity. But it is a' ways as cer- 
tain and always as deep, and will one day be far more public. 
Fix it firmly in your mind. It concerns you more than all 
the science you will ever know. You, too, are in the course 
of sin, and you know it. You have already begun to fall. 

Come again into this room. ' What, into a prayer-meet- 
ing? I don't go to such places." But, if you want to 
study the phenomena of religion scientifically, you should 
go to such places ; just as if you want to study geology, you 
should go to the places where the strata are exposed to view. 
I do not ask you to speak, and to ask people to pray for you, 
but only to look on and listen. If you are a philosopher I 
wish you to cease dogmatizing about fanaticism, and en- 
thusiasm, and the ignorance, and credulity of believers, at 
least until you philosophically examine the evidence upon 
which they believe. You can set aside, if you please, their 
unfounded beliefs concerning matters beyond their capacity, 
and also their confident hopes for futurity. What I wish 



* 2 Timothy, ^hap. iii. Read the whole -chapler. 



520 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



you to examine is their actual experience of religion, as they 
severally relate it For as we have seen, the facts of con- 
sciousness are just as certain, and as ascertainable, as the 
facts discovered by our senses; and there is no reason in 
the world why we should not pursue the study of religion 
in the same way that we gain a knowledge of science; 
namely, by collecting and studying the facts accumulated 
by those who have made experiments, and have obtained a 
practical knowledge of the matter. 

There are here, as you see, a great number of religious 
experimenters. They are also of very various conditions 
of life, and of various degrees of education. Many of them 
are moreover well known to you, so that you are in a favor- 
able position for forming a fair judgment of their discov- 
eries. There is your comrade Smith, Hopkins who does 
the hauling for your establishment, Lawyer Hammond, Pro- 
fessor Edwards, whose chemical lectures you attend, Dr. 
Lawrence, who lectured before the Lyceum last winter, Mr. 
Heidenberger, who wrote a series of articles on Comte's 
Positive Philosophy for the Investigator, Mrs. Bridgman, 
your Aunt Polly, who nursed you during your typhoid 
fever, and a great many others whom you know quite well. 
Professor Edwards leads in prayer, and gives a brief address. 
You never dreamt that he was hoaxing you when he told 
you of his chemical experience ; have you any reason to 
offer for believing that he now solemnly, and in the presence 
of G-od, lies to you and to this assembly, when he tells you 
of the peace he has found in believing in Christ, and the 
happiness he experiences in uniting with his brethren in 
the worship of God? Or is he more liable to error in not- 
ing the fact of his mental joy or sorrow, than in observing 
the effect of the extraordinary ray in double refraction ? If 
not, the fact that he has felt this religious experience, is 
just as certain as the fact, that he has seen polarized light. 

There is your comrade Smith, whom you have known for 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? * 



521 



years, actually got up to speak in meeting. You are sur- 
prised; but listen: ''Neighbors and friends, most of you 
know I never cared much about religion, and was often 
given to take more liquor than was good for me, and then I 
would fight and curse awful bad I knew as well as any- 
body that it wasn't right, and always felt bad after a spree, 
and many a time I said I would turn over a new leaf, and 
be good. But it was all no use, for as soon as any of the 
fellows would come around after me, I always went along 
with them, till at last I gave it up and said it was no use 
to try. Still, whenever any of my acquaintances died, I 
felt scared like ; and I kept away as far as I could from 
churches and preachers and such like, because I could not 
bear to think about God and judgment to come. Well, 
about five weeks ago my little Minnie set on me one Sab- 
bath morning to carry her to church, and to please the little 
creature — for she is as pert a darling as you could see any- 
where — I told my wife to get her ready, and we would go. 
She seemed as if she would cry, and kept talking to her- 
self all the way. When we got into the church the sing- 
ing almost upset me, for I had not been to a church since I 
was a little fellow, just before father and mother died. But 
it seemed as if it was the same tune, and as if the tune 
brought them all back, and as if I saw them again and all 
the family, and heard mother sing as she used to, and I for- 
got church and everything, and thought I was a little fel- 
low playing about on the floor just as I used to do when I 
was a happy child. When they stopped I was so sorry, and 
wished I could just be as innocent and as happy as I was 
then. Well, it seemed like the preacher had been reading 
my thoughts, for he gave out for his text, ' Verily, verily, I 
say unto you, unless a man he horn again he can not see the 
kingdom of God.' He began to preach how Jesus can give 
us new hearts, and save us from our sins; that his blood 
cleanses from all sin ; that he is able to save to the 



522 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



uttermost all that come unto God through him. The 
tears came into my eyes, and I could hardly keep my 
mouth shut till I got out. When I got home I knelt down, 
and cried to Jesus to save me from my sins ; and my wife 
prayed too, and we cried for mercy. The Lord heard us, 
and I felt light and happy, and I went to church again, and 
sung with the rest And the best of it is, the Lord de- 
livered me from the drink ; as I told a man who asked where 
I was going to-day, and I told him I was going to prayer- 
meeting, for I had got religion now. He said there were a 
great many religions, and most of them wrong, and a great 
many people said all religion was only a notion, and preach- 
ing only nonsense. I says to him, 1 Look here, stranger, do 
you see that tavern there?' ' Yes,' says he. 1 Well,' says 
I, 1 do you see me ? ' 'I do, of course,' says he. ' Well,' 
says I, 1 every little fellow in these parts knows that so long 
as Tom Smith had a quarter in his pocket he could never 
pass that tavern without having a drink. All the men in 
Jefferson could not stop him. Now look here,' says T, 
1 there is my week's wages, and I can go past, and thank 
God I don't feel the least like drinking, for the Lord Jesus 
has saved me from it. If you call that a notion, it is a 
mighty powerful notion, and it is a notion that has put 
clothes on my children's backs, and plenty of good food on 
my table, and songs of praise to the Lord in my mouth. 
That's a fact, stranger. Glory be to God for it. And I 
would recommend you to come to prayer-meeting with me, 
and maybe you would get religion too. A great many peo- 
ple are getting religion now.' " 

His last remark is certainly very true. There are so 
many, and of such various characters and grades of life, 
and in so many places, that every reader can easily find 
several Tom Smiths of his own acquaintance, whose con- 
versions display all the essential facts of this case, and prove 
that: 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



523 



5. The facts of religious experience are better attested, and 
more unobjectionable than those of any other science. 

Unless they can be shown to be unreasonable or impossi- 
ble, we are bound to receive them, when presented by the 
experimentists who have discovered them, though person- 
ally we may not have any such experience; just as we be- 
lieve the chemists, or the astronomers who relate their dis- 
coveries which personally we have not observed. But the 
facts of religion are by no means unreasonable. They can 
not be shown to contradict any known law of the human 
mind. It is true they are mysterious. But so are the facts 
of physical science — heat, light, electricity, gravitation. Of 
either, we may be quite certain that such phenomena exist, 
and utterly ignorant of the mode of their operation. It 
were as utterly unphilosophical to deny that Almighty God 
could impart nervous energy to the languid limbs of your 
sick neighbor, because you are ignorant of its origin and 
means of transmission, as to deny that God could impart 
spiritual electricity to his paralyzed soul, because you are 
ignorant of the mode in which he bestows it. And igno- 
rance is all that you can plead in this case. You must just 
admit that having tried an experiment which you have not, 
your religious friend has a right to know more than you. 

Moreover, the facts of religion are presented for belief 
upon the most abundant and reliable testimony. In physical 
science you must rely on the testimony of a very few ob- 
servers — the great bulk even of scientific men having no 
opportunity of testing the facts themselves, and being well 
satisfied if any fact is confirmed by the testimony of two or 
three philosophers — and this testimony often contradictory, 
and always fallible, as the discordant results of their exper- 
iments prove. But here you have a great multitude of ex^ 
pcrimcntists, in every city and village of the land, of every 
variety of intellect and education, prosecuting the same 
course of experiments, and all arriving at the same results. 



524 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



They do not all confess the same sins, but they all felt the 
power of some sin, and felt miserable in their guilt. And 
however they may differ in their external circumstances, 
their inward constitution, or in their views of the outward 
part of religion, there is no difference among them about 
the great facts of their religious experience. They all be- 
lieved the faithful saying that Christ Jesus came into the- 
world to save sinners, cried to God for mercy through him, 
and received peace of mind, grace to live a new life, and to 
delight in the worship of God. Do you know any science 
which has been prosecuted by one-hundredth part of this 
number of inquirers? Which has been confirmed by one- 
thousandth part of this number of experimenters? Or any 
experiment tried with such uniform and unfailing success 
as this, " Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall 
be saved?"* Why then do you hesitate to admit the cor- 
rectness of these facts? Is it because you perceive they 
lead to results which you dislike? 

They do lead to results. They are effects and tell us of 
a cause. They are powerful effects, and proclaim a power- 
ful cause. They are moral and spiritual effects, and assure 
us of the existence of a moral and spiritual agent who has 
caused them. They are holy effects, and convince your sin- 
ful soul that they are produced by a holy being. But they 
are also benevolent, life-giving, blessed effects, and proclaim 
that God is love. The Lord, the Spirit, is as plainly de- 
clared in the facts of religious experience, as the Creator is 
in the creation of the universe; and it were as rank Athe- 
ism to attribute these orderly and blessed results to chance 
or to evil passions, as to attribute the Cosmos to blind fate, 
or to the beasts that perish. He is as much an enemy to 
his happiness who denies the one, as a foe to his reason who 



* Romans, chap. x. Read the chapter. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



525 



rejects the other. Dear reader, why should you not be- 
lieve in, 

6. The only science which can make you happy f which 
can bestow peace of mind, nerve you to conquer your evil 
habits, enable you to live a holy and happy life, and to die 
with a blessed hope of a glorious resurrection ? You know 
there is no science which makes any such offers, or which 
you would believe if it did. But the Bible unfolds a science 
which does, and enables you to believe it too. The facts of 
religious experience give most convincing evidence of the 
reality and power of the grace of God. It were as easy to 
persuade a Christian that he had produced this change of 
heart and life by the excitement of his own feelings, as that 
he had kindled the sun with a lucifer match. And the 
character of the work and the worker assures him that it 
will not be left unfinished. His faith receives these facts 
of religious experience as the first installments upon God's 
bonds, and as pledges for the payment of the remainder of 
his promises The joy and peace which God gives him 
now, prove most satisfactorily his ability and willingness to 
give him larger measures of these enjoyments when he is 
capable of receiving them. Just as we have good reason 
to believe that he who has made the sun to rise out of 
darkness will guide him onward in his course to perfect day, 
have we also good reason to believe that he that hath begun 
the good work of his grace in us will perform it until the 
day of Jesus Christ. Christ is in us the hope of glory. 
This eternal life, which is begun in our souls, is so much 
superior to mere animal vitality, that we can not doubt that 
he who has given us the greater, will also give us the lesser, 
and quicken our mortal bodies also, by his Spirit which 
dwelleth in us. We know that our Redeemer liveth. 

7. And now, in conclusion, dear reader, we ask you not 
to take these things on our testimony, nor yet on our ex- 
perience j but to try for yourself. Oh taste and see that the 



526 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



Lord is good. Come see the Savior who has saved us, and 
he saved by him too. There is nothing more dangerous, 
unless resisting the evidence of the truth as it is in Jesus, 
than acknowledging this to be truth without immediately 
obeying the gospel. God requires your immediate and 
cordial acceptance of Christ to save you from your sins. He 
tells you that the only way of escape from your sins now 
and from hell hereafter is through him ; for there is none 
other name given under heaven or among men whereby you 
must be saved. lie promises to hear your prayer and give 
you his Holy Spirit to work in you the work of faith with 
power, if you will only and earnestly ask. "Ask, and it 
shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it 
shall be opened unto you: What man is there of you whom 
if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask 
a fish, will he give him a serpent ? If ye then being evil 
know how to give good gifts unto your children, hoio much 
more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things 
to them that ask him?"* 

Thus you will come to possess an actual experimental 
knowledge of the most excellent of the sciences. In the 
present begun enjoyment of eternal life you will, not merely 
believe in, but positively know, its Author, the only true 
God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent. You will rest 
in no fallible and erring testimony of man's wisdom, but 
your faith will stand in the power of God. You will be 
able to say, u Now we believe not because of thy sayings : for ' 
vie have heard him ourselves, and KNOW that this is indeed 
the Christ, the Savior of the world ."f 

Hear God's own warrant and invitation to your poor, 
thirsty soul, to forsake your vanities and come and be eter- 



* The Sermon on the Mount. Eead it alL 
f John, chap. iv. 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH ? 



527 



nally blessed in Christ. Have the witness in yourself and 
be a living proof of the blessed reality of religion. 

" Ho every one that thirsteth ! Come ye to the waters ! 
" And he who hath no money ! Come ye, buy and eat ! 
" Yea, come ! Buy wine and milk without money and with- 
out price. 

" Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread ? 

" And your labor for that which satisfieth not? 

" Hearken diligently unto me and eat ye that which is good, 

" And let your soul delight itself in fatness. 

(> Incline your ear and come unto me : 

" Hear and your soul shall live : 

" And I will make an everlasting covenant with you, 
" Even the sure mercies of David. 

" Behold! I have given him for a witness to the people, 
'< A leader and a commander to the people : 
' Behold ! thoit shalt call nations that thou knowest not, 
" And nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee, 
" Because of the Lord thy God, 

" And for the Holy One of Israel, for he hath glorified thee. 

" Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, 
11 Call ye upon him while he is near : 
" Let the wicked forsake his way, 
" And the unrighteous man his thoughts ; 
" And let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy 
upon him, 

" And to our God for he will abundantly pardon. 

" For my thoughts are not your thoughts, 

" Neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. 

" For as the heavens are higher than the earth, 

" So are my ways higher than your ways, 

" And my thoughts than your thoughts. 

t l For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, 

" And return not thither again, 



528 



SCIENCE, OR FAITH? 



" But water the earth, and cause it to bring forth and bud, 
" That it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater; 
" So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth : 
" It shall not return unto me void, 
" But it shall accomplish that which I please, 
" And it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. 
" For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace. 
" The mountains and the hills shall break forth before you 
into singing, 

" And all the trees of the fields shall clap their hands. 

" Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, 

" And instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree : 

" And it shall be to the Lord for a name, 

u For an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off." 



[the end.] 



r H2 82 



> 4 



.V 




I 



